One in five Americans smokes cigarettes. Percentage steady since 2005.

[Zebo]

Maybe, but it should be federal law that any regular check up with doctor exam revealing a smoking habit would be forced to be reported to the insurance company and instantly multiply your premium by (10) at minimum.

That should be federal standard. Then maybe the insurance companies will stop charging healthy minded people so much and make the ones prone to killing themselves actually pay for it.

A "points" system like with Car Insurance. Except you get 100 points for smoking. :twisted:

Smokers are cheaper on society than non smokers. It's the heath nuts you gotta watch out for with our social welfare system in place past 63

 

[MJinZ]

Why should a federal law mandate anything? Why not CHOOSE an insurance company that charges smokers more. Vote with your wallet instead of demanding big brother placate your morals?

Morals?

Who gives a shit about morals here?

I'm talking about MONEY.

Now stop taking my money by smoking, because I indirectly subsidize your own under-charged insurance premiums.

 

[2Xtreme21]

Morals?

Who gives a shit about morals here?

I'm talking about MONEY.

Now stop taking my money by smoking, because I indirectly subsidize your own under-charged insurance premiums.

Dude seriously. Read the response to your comment before.

 

[MJinZ]

Smokers cost less over the long term than non smokers. I think you mean they should be given a 1000% discount ;^)

In that case, smoke away.

We really don't need so many old people taking up precious air, space, and resources anyway.

I guess things have a way of working themselves out.

 

[Amused]

Morals?

Who gives a shit about morals here?

I'm talking about MONEY.

Now stop taking my money by smoking, because I indirectly subsidize your own under-charged insurance premiums.

Your assumtion that I smoke is horribly misguided.

I'm talking about money as well. You are morally outraged that some of your insurance money goes to treat the illnesses of smokers. Well, what comes around goes around. Most everyone takes unnecessary risks in life. What's yours?

 

[Zebo]

Morals?

Who gives a shit about morals here?

I'm talking about MONEY.

Now stop taking my money by smoking, because I indirectly subsidize your own under-charged insurance premiums.

Grandma who never smoked tea totter sucking off SS for 30 years, 2 hip surgeries later, 2 knee replacements, Quad bypass, cancer treatment, 15 prescriptions your filling every month is who is taking your money, not smokers. They are usually toast by 60-65.

 

[MJinZ]

Grandma who never smoked tea totter sucking off SS for 30 years, 2 hip surgeries later, 2 knee replacements, Quad bypass, cancer treatment, 15 prescriptions your filling every month is who is taking your money, not smokers.

I think Grandma is to be commended for stimulating the economy.

The smokers just lay there in their graves being lazy-asses and contributing nothing.

Basically - smokers are bad. They are bad bad people. Booo.

They are also stupid, as I've smoked many kinds of cigarettes and cigars for testing the waters, and the effect is next to worthless. They should have learned a thing or two and went with Marijuana. At least, that stuff is cheaper and gives you a high.

 

[Zebo]

I think Grandma is to be commended for stimulating the economy.

The smokers just lay there in their graves being lazy-asses and contributing nothing.

Basically - smokers are bad. They are bad bad people. Booo.

They are also stupid, as I've smoked many kinds of cigarettes and cigars for testing the waters, and the effect is next to worthless. They should have learned a thing or two and went with Marijuana. At least, that stuff is cheaper and gives you a high.

Best thing about smokers is they contributed without taking on the back end. They are usually high strung fucks anyway so they work hard while sucking those sticks. Then bye bye.


Frankly we should be encouraging smoking to solve SS shortfalls.

 

[MJinZ]

Best thing about smokers is they contributed without taking on the back end. They are usually high strung fucks anyway so they work hard while sucking those sticks. Then bye bye.


Frankly we should be encouraging smoking to solve SS shortfalls.

I would recommend overpopulated countries to smoke, but to recommend Americans to smoke is probably not the best idea.

 

[Amused]

I would recommend overpopulated countries to smoke, but to recommend Americans to smoke is probably not the best idea.

Makes no sense. That VAST majority of smoking illnesses happen LONG after breeding age. And, in fact, the most populous countries on earth DO have the highest smoking rates.

 

[MJinZ]

Makes no sense. That VAST majority of smoking illnesses happen LONG after breeding age. And, in fact, the most populous countries on earth DO have the highest smoking rates.

Well that's good, it increases turn-over.

However, if you die too early, the chances of you actually making larger wages decreases as the highest earning years are in the later years.

Also, if you die too early, your kids will be sad and will kill themselves.

And thus, society ends.

 

[Zebo]

I don't smoke weed. Makes me paranoid, and stupider (like I need that) and want to curl up under bed. But it's your right just like smoking should be for those who smoke. You hurt none just like smokers hurt none. In fact they help at the macroeconomic level. Basically you want to take freedom away from a subset of what you enjoy..what a hypocrite.

 

[OverVolt]

Why is it so hard for people to leave others be? Who appointed you their nanny?

Victimless crime laws ARE pointless.

The Constitution has nothing to do with victimless crime laws. Burning it would actually increase this kind of nonsense.

Why should governments protect individuals from themselves? Maybe we should all be forced into padded rooms?

Because it needlessly burdens the healthcare system? Some things like car accidents are just an everyday risk where the benefit outweighs the risk by far, but for smoking there isn't really a tangible benefit for society but it ends up costing us alot of money.

 

[2Xtreme21]

Because it needlessly burdens the healthcare system? Some things like car accidents are just an everyday risk where the benefit outweighs the risk by far, but for smoking there isn't really a tangible benefit for society but it ends up costing us alot of money.

Smokers go out and buy packs of cigarettes that are heavily subsidized by the government for society's benefit.

 

[Amused]

Because it needlessly burdens the healthcare system? Some things like car accidents are just an everyday risk where the benefit outweighs the risk by far, but for smoking there isn't really a tangible benefit for society but it ends up costing us alot of money.

Individual freedom is NOT weighed by "benefit to society." Sorry, comrade. Wrong country.

 

[2Xtreme21]

Individual freedom is NOT weighed by "benefit to society." Sorry, comrade. Wrong country.

Though I can kinda see his point... individual freedom only exists to the point where you're infringing on someone else's freedom. In this case, however, no encroachment on others' freedoms found.

 

[Amused]

Though I can kinda see his point... individual freedom only exists to the point where you're infringing on someone else's freedom. In this case, however, no encroachment on others' freedoms found.

Exactly. One does not and SHOULD not have to justify their freedom by "does it benefit society." The ONLY justification for restriction should be "does it infringe on the rights of another."

 

[OverVolt]

./

 

[BoomerD]

Maybe, but it should be federal law that any regular check up with doctor exam revealing a smoking habit would be forced to be reported to the insurance company and instantly multiply your premium by (10) at minimum.

That should be federal standard. Then maybe the insurance companies will stop charging healthy minded people so much and make the ones prone to killing themselves actually pay for it.

A "points" system like with Car Insurance. Except you get 100 points for smoking. :twisted:

How many points for being Black? How about Asian or Jewish? All those groups have much higher than "normal" genetic disease probabilities...

How about points on your health insurance and life insurance based on what car you drive?

Next up, alcohol use...drinking beyond moderation definitely can cause health problems...

What about mandating monthly drug testing? Increase the premiums 500 fold for anyone who tests even a tiny bit positive for any of the "controlled substances" or for prescription meds without a valid current prescription for that drug.

As already mentioned above, higher premiums for those who live in polluted areas, for those who live in cities, (higher crime rate) and for those who participate in any type of physical sport.

Yessiree...quite a slippery slope...

 

[zinfamous]

How many points for being Black? How about Asian or Jewish? All those groups have much higher than "normal" genetic disease probabilities...

How about points on your health insurance and life insurance based on what car you drive?

Next up, alcohol use...drinking beyond moderation definitely can cause health problems...

What about mandating monthly drug testing? Increase the premiums 500 fold for anyone who tests even a tiny bit positive for any of the "controlled substances" or for prescription meds without a valid current prescription for that drug.

As already mentioned above, higher premiums for those who live in polluted areas, for those who live in cities, (higher crime rate) and for those who participate in any type of physical sport.

Yessiree...quite a slippery slope...

I see your point, but you can't really compare those conditions that are chosen against those that are not (drinking vs. race).

I agree that it's a terrible argument, though.

 

[BoomerD]

I see your point, but you can't really compare those conditions that are chosen against those that are not (drinking vs. race).

I agree that it's a terrible argument, though.

Chosen...not chosen...if the argument is about money...factors that affect claims, then it doesn't matter.

 

[lxskllr]

I didn't choose to be male, but the insurance companies don't have a problem charging me more for car insurance....

 

[Bignate603]

Why should a federal law mandate anything? Why not CHOOSE an insurance company that charges smokers more. Vote with your wallet instead of demanding big brother placate your morals?

If I had the choice of an insurance company that gave me discounts for living healthy I'd do it in a heartbeat. Hell, if my company gave discounts for people to go to the company gym regularly or attend one of their 'wellness' classes they'd get people to make use of those things quite a bit more.

They're already going to start charging smokers at my company an extra $500 a year starting next year for coverage unless they enroll in and attend a smoking cessation program. Seems perfectly fair to me, if you choose to continue in a program that runs up higher costs you should pay higher premiums but if you choose to make a earnest attempt at quitting the habit you can avoid the cost.

I didn't choose to be male, but the insurance companies don't have a problem charging me more for car insurance....

If you really wanted to you could choose not to be male. The surgery probably costs more than the higher insurance though.

 

[lxskllr]

They're already going to start charging smokers at my company an extra $500 a year starting next year for coverage unless they enroll in and attend a smoking cessation program. Seems perfectly fair to me, if you choose to continue in a program that runs up higher costs you should pay higher premiums but if you choose to make a earnest attempt at quitting the habit you can avoid the cost.

It doesn't run up higher costs. Smokers cost LESS than non smokers. It's a money grab is all it is.

Here's an excerpt of a PM I sent someone else...

Tobacco users are the awesome people of the 21st century. It's become acceptable to discriminate against users, and is in fact, encouraged. The government robs users of money. The insurance companies rob users of money, and people's livelihoods can be jeopardized simply for the fact they use a LEGAL product. In addition to that, legitimate research into useful tobacco properties is discouraged, and mass hysteria surrounds tobacco. Light use is virtually harmless, and is no worse for you than a daily cheeseburger, and glass of Coke, or any of the other things people like to do.

 

[moshquerade]

Current smokers -- defined as those who reported having smoked at least 100 cigarettes in their lifetimes and were smoking regularly at the time they were interviewed -- are more likely to be male, poor, non-Hispanic white or black, lacking a high school diploma, and living in the South or Midwest, the CDC reported.

no surprise there...