Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: little jeremiah
I’m not making moral judgements; just that conditions that are caused by habits or choices, or exacerbated, should be handled differently than conditions that are not.

Handled differently? What does that mean? Treatment costs are what they are, insurance costs are a different category.

Smokers should pay more in insurance due to the risk, so should homosexuals, that does not mean a heterosexual can not get AIDS (think transfusion) or that non smokers can't get lung cancer.

Congratulations on being an ex-smoker! I am one too.

Thanks! November 17th is my one year anniversary.

I have never had health insurance but from what I have read, people are charged a bit less if they do not smoke or have other good health habits; correct me if I am wrong.

You're not wrong, and that's a basic fault with Obamacare. Not all risks are the same, so why should a non smoker pay the same as a smoker or a heterosexual pay the same as a Homosexual?

Of course, to be really fair (playing by same rules, not meaning same outcome), people should be asked if they are monogamous or not, homosexual or not, etc as these factor in health costs.

Only in regards to insurance costs, not treatment. And remember, people lie.

But if someone gets lung cancer due to whatever the cause, or unknown cause, the treatment costs should not be different for different people.

I agree, even if it sounded like I did'nt

1,519 posted on 10/29/2018 5:32:27 PM PDT by KittenClaws ("They've got Daryl's Dad's car! .....Red Dawn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1193 | View Replies ]


To: KittenClaws; little jeremiah
Not all risks are the same, so why should a non smoker pay the same as a smoker or a heterosexual pay the same as a Homosexual?

Or an obese person, or a motorcycle racer?

What you are describing is called "underwriting"> It happens all the time with P&C and life insurance....all those question the insurance agent asks. It works to reward those with healthy lifestyles by giving them lower premiums. (they are less likely to have claims)

The opposite is called "community rating" where underwriting is banned and everyone pays the same. (the RAT concept of fairness)

if someone gets lung cancer due to whatever the cause, or unknown cause, the treatment costs should not be different for different people.

The provider costs would likely be the same, but the non-smoker should have to pay a higher premium before the illness, and the non-smoker should not have their premium changed, nor be dropped.

The policy contract compels the carrier to assume the risk of the insured at a predetermined rate...if illness should occur, the carrier must pay and continue coverage. At least, that's the way it is supposed to work.

Just think in terms of car insurance.

1,577 posted on 10/29/2018 10:10:11 PM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (The Obama is about to hit the fan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1519 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson