They're just now realizing this? When I applied for life insurance, it asked if I used tobacco. I lied.
1 posted on
02/16/2006 4:58:39 PM PST by
LouAvul
To: LouAvul
2 posted on
02/16/2006 4:59:01 PM PST by
LouAvul
To: LouAvul; The Foolkiller; Just another Joe; Madame Dufarge; Cantiloper; metesky; kattracks; ...
4 posted on
02/16/2006 5:00:32 PM PST by
SheLion
(Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
To: LouAvul
If smoking makes health care more costly then health care cost should be at their lowest historical rates since the 50's, since smoking has decreased per capita since then.
5 posted on
02/16/2006 5:01:43 PM PST by
SheLion
(Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
To: LouAvul
There's nothing wrong with this.when you apply for life insurance you're asked if you have high blood pressure or cancer and if you skydive.Your premiums are set with the answers to these questions in mind.
If you smoke,weigh 400 pounds or have uncontrolled hypertension then your premiums should be higher.
To: LouAvul
hey great but don't whine when they go after drinkers and fat people....remember the lawsuits...everybody was so happy they were going after the evil tobacco companies but now they going after fast food,sodas and cereal so if they wanna do it then go for it but don't whine when its your vice next
8 posted on
02/16/2006 5:04:56 PM PST by
skaterboy
To: LouAvul
I may be all wet, but I think genetics are the chief factor in longevity. If both of your parents died young, your chances are that you might too. I think the inverse tends to hold true also.
To: LouAvul
They're just now realizing this? When I applied for life insurance, it asked if I used tobacco. I lied. Thats just it its already figured in
Insurers know what policies theyve sold, who theyve sold them to, and what they paid out in claims. Its on the books and in the bag, no guesswork required.
They know what the generic company looks like. They know what its generic makeup is and what percentage smoke whether they admit it or not.
That, in part, determines what premium they are willing to offer your employer. Figured up, averaged out, and packaged into a nice, neat little group rate.
If you want to start tagging people that are using more services than they are paying for youd start with sexually active females of childbearing age. Then youd extend that to all females, in general.
I'd like to point out that it has been a few years since I have been involved with rate determination, so maybe they've completely changed things since then.
To: LouAvul
Give it a break, Lou. You've already established your I-hate-private-property credentials. Tell us how much you love Napoleonic law. And go ahead and tell us about the uplifting freedom of democracy rules.
14 posted on
02/16/2006 5:14:15 PM PST by
sergeantdave
(And on the second day The Lord created February - the slowest month of the year.)
To: LouAvul
15 posted on
02/16/2006 5:16:47 PM PST by
Doohickey
(If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice...I will choose freewill.)
To: LouAvul
That is what is going to happen with smokers in their health care relationships with doctors, too. The smokers will lie about smoking if it is going to harm them economically and socailly. "Do you smoke, Mr. Jones? I used to but I quit, Dr. Nosebud!"
17 posted on
02/16/2006 5:20:09 PM PST by
Galveston Grl
(Getting angry and abandoning power to the Democrats is not a choice.)
To: LouAvul
Seems treatment of HIV and\or AIDS would make premiums way higher than a smokers.
So, if a company offers benefits to same-sex partners, shouldn't their premiums go WAAAAAAY up ?
19 posted on
02/16/2006 5:23:56 PM PST by
stylin19a
(quoting the commerce department)
To: LouAvul
No mention of skydivers, motorcyclists, skiers, nymphomaniacs or butt pirates.
Curious.
To: LouAvul
What garbage. Smokers are a boon to the healthcare industry. They tend die rather quickly at a younger age.
This is merely another Nazi tax on the one group everyone knows they can pick on and raid their wallets.
23 posted on
02/16/2006 5:41:40 PM PST by
Reactionary
(The Moonbats Need an Enema)
To: LouAvul
Don't they ralize that by dying younger the smokers are saving them costs in the long run?
24 posted on
02/16/2006 5:46:01 PM PST by
BenLurkin
(O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
To: LouAvul
...$20 to $50 a month Wow, that will really prompt a lot of people to quit. That's about the price of a carton of cigarettes. I don't get it. Let's ban smoking and give drug addicts their fix. If they want to lower health costs, why don't they get rid of lawyers like John Edwards?
30 posted on
02/16/2006 6:19:25 PM PST by
kddid
(Hillary Clinton will never be President of the United States.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson