Who'da thunk it????

[Karee 4,190]

If they're going to punish smokers for healthcare costs, then they should be rewarded with higher Social Security disbursements monthly since they wont live as long as healthy people. Can't have it both ways. Dieing early is a financial benefit for the govt.

Edited January 25, 2013 by Karee

[SMR 368]

and that is why aids prevention and education is important. and don't forget about intravenous drug users - in that instance clean needle programs and addiction treatment is important.

being a female - i am at a higher risk to develop breast cancer, what's your point?

So should we charge black people more because they are more susceptible to diabetes?

A distinction should be made between characteristics and behaviors: you can stop smoking or having sex with other men but you can't stop being black or a woman. However, the larger point is that once the government runs healthcare, any behavior that can be linked to health risks can be regulated or taxed. Smoking is just a demonstration that the government has already taken this step. How much do you eat? What do you eat? How much do you exercise? Do you use condoms? Do you have sex with multiple partners (simultaneously or serially)? Do you have pets? How much TV do you watch? Are you married? How much do you drink? Homosexuality is just a good test case because it gets a lot of people going and the health risks are well documented.

Corporations are doing this. Surcharges for smokers, discounts and incentives for healthy lifestyles, etc. They do this because they know that certain behaviors cause increased health care costs and result in lost productivity. So they do what they can to drive down cost and improve productivity.

A corporation offering you a product and the government fining you if you don't use their product are two different cases.

That is changing.

ETA: I thought that passed, but evidently, is still in the process.

As blood donations decline, U.S. ban on gay donors is examined

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/10/tainted-why-gay-men-still-cant-donate-blood/262722/

It may change; it may not. But if it does change, it will change because the determination is made that the laboratory screening tests for the blood are accurate enough that the interview screening tests are obsolete. It won't change because the interview questions aren't relevant. They are relevant as documented by the CDC.

[decocker 7,198]

A distinction should be made between characteristics and behaviors: you can stop smoking or having sex with other men but you can't stop being black or a woman. However, the larger point is that once the government runs healthcare, any behavior that can be linked to health risks can be regulated or taxed.

and the validity of that point comes down to how you perceive the intentions of our government.

the u.s ranks 38 in the WHO's ranking of health care systems. for as much as i pay into this system, i'd like more for my money. i haven't really seen very much in the way of proposals or solutions. i've seen a lot of hype though..

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

and the validity of that point comes down to how you perceive the intentions of our government.

the u.s ranks 38 in the WHO's ranking of health care systems. for as much as i pay into this system, i'd like more for my money. i haven't really seen very much in the way of proposals or solutions. i've seen a lot of hype though..

You ignore proposals and solutions and say there are none.

FIRST make health insurance available without restriction, such as we do for homeowners and auto insurance. You want to reduce costs? Increase competitiveness. I wanted to see GEICO health insurance commercials with a cute talking lizard (but lose the annoying accent)

SECOND eliminate frivolous lawsuits so we reduce the cost of defensive medicine and paying for tests we do not need just to protect the doctor from being sued. The government will do this anyway, so why not.

ONCE those changes have been implemented see what happens. But no, you will nto want that.

OK, so simply expand medicare to cover everyone OR simply offer a single insurance carrier for everyone, ie. expand the federal employee health coverage to everyone. Obama care amounts to nothing more than mandated insurance and it will not reduce costs anymore than mandatory auto insurance reduced costs.

The nonsense of using this system for social engineering is one of the major problems and our Government has a number 1 rating in using programs for social engineering, rather than the purpose intended. This is just the most recent example...and the first example. I promise you, there WILL be other "behavior modification and punishment" handed out. Smokers were just the low hanging fruit, but the government will not stop there.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

A distinction should be made between characteristics and behaviors: you can stop smoking or having sex with other men but you can't stop being black or a woman. However, the larger point is that once the government runs healthcare, any behavior that can be linked to health risks can be regulated or taxed. Smoking is just a demonstration that the government has already taken this step. How much do you eat? What do you eat? How much do you exercise? Do you use condoms? Do you have sex with multiple partners (simultaneously or serially)? Do you have pets? How much TV do you watch? Are you married? How much do you drink? Homosexuality is just a good test case because it gets a lot of people going and the health risks are well documented.

Exactly! But in the end they will not even make that distinction...or it will get blurred. Type 2 diabetes is linked to obesity and improper diet, therefore it is "self inflicted" and therefore should be punished. It won;t matter, anything that COSTS more can be taxed or punished. "Sorry you can't help being black BUT blacks have higher health risks so you have to be taxed more for being black" As each of these things happens, more people will protest, but by then it is too late.

Val Erie will finally get the clue when they start taxing homosexuals, but by then they will have already punished the obese and alcoholics.

UNIVERSAL health care ias what we wanted. THIS IS NOT IT