Obamacare: Lose weight and stop smoking or pay a penalty

How is that different from private insurance? Oh yeah, private insurance will also deny coverage altogether.

Now that is HC Reform. Imagine reducing diabetes, lung cancer, heart disease... The best part is, it is FREE!!! Don't need a dime for some fat POS to get up off his ass and take a walk. Or eat a damn salad instead of a Big Mac....

But seeing as almost 30 percent of the cost to Medicare/Medicaid can be linked to smoking and alcohol abuse, I doubt it wiil be taken seriously.

How is that different from private insurance? Oh yeah, private insurance will also deny coverage altogether.

#1 | Posted by DARTHCHENEY

It's the same thing except now it's the government doing it.

Don't forget to say thank you.

Remember the fat tax? Here it comes again.

Ok no more chili cheese fries for you couch potatoes.

You know who you are. Doc, you're the most guilty. Nanc is next.

Remember the fat tax? Here it comes again.

#4 | Posted by mysterytoy at 2009-10-16 07:00 PM | Reply | Flag: Fat

So . . . if you're grossly overweight, and a group of bureaucrats say that you can't get a transplant . . . what would be a good moniker for such a panel?

Fatcutters? Chubby Checkers?

"if you're grossly overweight, and a group of bureaucrats say that you can't get a transplant . . . what would be a good moniker for such a panel?"

I don't know. What do hospitals currently call the panels of bureaucrats they have that set the rules for who is and isn't eligible for a transplant?

if you are grossly overweight

you SHOULD pay a premium
fat bastards.

This is good legislation. Mandatory exercise should be a way of life. Instead of going to church go to the gym.

I know some fat bastards, a lot of them think they are 100% healthy. I know a lot of smokers too, not sure which group is more annoying. A fat smoker is pretty much a person who has completely given up on life. Why are alcoholics and heavy drinkers being given a pass on this?

So how does this work for someone who is on welfare and overweight? Do the taxpayer's pick up thier extra premium?

If the justification here is to save money there are studies that show that is not the case. If we provide cradle to grave coverage overweight people and smokers cost less.

What about people who do other things to increase healthcare costs like have children? Will we limit the number of children someone should have based on the cost to cover them?

Just another case of people feeling a need to control others.

I think this falls in the "personal responsibility" category!
If you are fat unhealthy pig ---- why should the rest of us pay for it!

With that said ----- no wonder the WingDings don't like the Idea!

I know it's nanny government, but I like the idea that private and public insurers can provide penalties and rewards to get people to stop smoking, lose weight and lower their cholesterol.

So if someone is allergic to statin medication to lower cholesterol, they should be penalized for what mother nature has given them? That's my story. And even though I eat well, exercise 5-6 times a week, an weigh 160 lbs at 5'9"...I am diabetic too. You can legislate health..it's called life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Keep the fuck away from telling us how to live, douche bags.

Sounds like a bunch of horseshit nanny state they know better then you gov. Do as they say, not as they do. Let's face it Sotomayor is FAT. But she's on the gov plan and won't have to follow the rules she approves of. Nor will Congress, cause they have their own diamond plated HC.

can/can't

With that said ----- no wonder the WingDings don't like the Idea!

#14 | Posted by Redneckville"

Anybody who doesn't agree with what you think is a wing ding. Come on and try to debate the facts on their merits, instead of pulling an Obama like insult.

How does this grap you now???

Let me be perfectly clear, if you have your health plan and you like it, you can keep it

AS A BOLD FACE LIE

Lousy PR job. Should be billed as a discount/reward for maintaining excellent health.

"I know it's nanny government, but I like the idea that private and public insurers can provide penalties and rewards to get people to stop smoking, lose weight and lower their cholesterol."

It's only common sense. ALL insurance has rates based upon risk. Life insurance premiums are higher for fatties and smokers. Auto insurance rates are higher for younger male drivers etc. Health insurance rates should be based upon the same principles or it won't work. Maybe we should look at a pool of "assigned risk" insurance like auto insurance companies do.

it is amazing to me how many people on this thread are more that willing to let the government tell you how to live.

"So if someone is allergic to statin medication to lower cholesterol, they should be penalized for what mother nature has given them?"

What's that got to do with being fat and smoking?

Who says that's a nanny government decision? that's just a risk assesment geared towards keeping rates low for those of us who are doing our part. Sound capitalist ideals, the righties ought to be proud, but they like it the least. They're probably just afraid of going to the gym. Might be some gay guy there who could bench press their fat ass with one arm and make them question their masculinity.

Isn't this a form of discrimination by the government? Will companies now be able to deny employment based on the employee weight?

I also believe that there should be a benifit for being healthy and for those who choose to be unhealthy, they should have to pay more but I don't think mandated penalties by the government is the key.

The government is ready to tax soda's and everything else. The government believes that if the people can't make healthy choices, they will make those choices for everyone by taxing them until they stop making those choices. It's been happening for a long time with alcohol, tabacco, and now it's going into over drive.

Please commence with the name calling since that is usually what happens when someone gives an opinion that the majority doesn't agree with

What's that got to do with being fat and smoking?

It has to do with high cholestorol sparky.

Now here is a question, I am a smoker, I am also in excelent health and shape other than this little thing called MS. There is no way I could physicaly pass a health screen but it has squat to do with smoking and everything to do with MS. So because I smoke and can't pass the health screen they get to jack my rates?

Amazing how people judge people. If your diabetic, it is very very hard to lose weight. Your metabolism is all screwed up and you have to eat regular.

Some of the reasons you become diabetic, heredity and say because you fought in Viet Nam and Agent Orange caused your diabetes. No fault of your own. Yet people here will judge you call people fat asses etc.

Love how these self righteous people judge people. Many people started smoking 30 40 50 years ago when it was cool and now they are hooked.

Judge not or ye be judge you bunch of hypocrites

Ever notice most of the people that reply on this page are so self righteous and think they know everything?

They love putting people down, telling people how
to live their lives.

They assume if someone is fat they are lazy or weak.

They actually want government to run their lives, that usually is a sign of weakness in itself.

I am 100% disabled vet, hard to believe I served to protect the scum that write on this page.

The government runs the VA and VA care sucks. You wait forever. Need a knee replacement? Get in line only be a few months wait. No choice of doctors. They do not use the latest methods. Hospitals are filthy. Get sick on weekends?? Please wait till Monday.

And if your a vet and you do not like it, there is no where else to go.

And you people want this? You have no idea what you will be getting.

"But seeing as almost 30 percent of the cost to Medicare/Medicaid can be linked to smoking and alcohol abuse, I doubt it wiil be taken seriously."
#2 | Posted by crispee_oc

Odd statistic you have there considering 30% of the people smoke and abuse alcohol. Will you next will say 40% can be linked to obesity? How about saying almost 45% of the cost of medical bills are linked to liberalism?

They not only will punish the obese or the smokers--they will punish the well and the young and the old and the blacks and the whites and the asians and the ....

And your rates are hiked up NOW if you smoke and overweight.

#27 | Posted by buckeye431

Thank you for your service Buck--

What branch?

Calif Chris keeps track of the DR vets and current military here.

good..

Boy if I am not all fucked up. I can't win for losing. Sighhhhhhhh LMAO oh well shit happens.

Larry

LAR-
Will you be satisfied when your govenment tells you you can't receive certain treatments because you don't sufficiently adhere to national health standards?

Listen OohRah I make no bones with the fact that I have absolutely NO excuse for the way that I am. NONE whatsoever. It will piss Me off if I can not get a service that may save My life because of My obesity. But at the end of the day I have Myself and only Myself to blame for that. Other people may have a legitament gripe IE Thiroid what have You. Nobody stuck a gun to My head and told Me You eat this or drink this or I am shooting You dead. My Condition is My doing.

Larry

Why are alcoholics and heavy drinkers being given a pass on this?

#12 | Posted by NoGov4Me at 2009-10-17 06:14 AM | Reply | Flag:

Ever heard the term "sin tax"?

They were and still are high taxes place on the products because of the risk involved. At their inception the idea was the government would put that money away so that when they had to deal with the consequences they'd/the government/the people would have the money to take care of it.

How's that worked out?

Boy if I am not all fucked up. I can't win for losing. Sighhhhhhhh LMAO oh well shit happens.

Larry

#33 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-10-17 06:12 PM

Well, you know the old saying.

When you lie down with dogs don't be surprised when you wake up with fleas.

You's in big trouble when liberal care is passed.

Do you want this mark on your hand or do you just want us to stamp it into your fat forehead?

Larry, please stop pushing your socialistic agenda, because once there, all the rest of us will probably end up in the same condition and on your couch. I don't think all of us could fit.

You think Sotomayor has a problem? Have you seen the new surgeon general? How about "smokin Joe" Obama. What a bunch of fine examples.

Also, in this "conceptual" piece of legislation are bureaucratic quality groups. If you and your physician decide on a major surgery, this group would look at your age, medical diagnosis, and other parameters and then do their statistical analysis on your life expectancy. The decision would then be whether they would approve the procedure or whether you would be dead meat. 1984 is closer then we think.

Death Panel.

They ought to put the same pressure on gay males, who notoriously bring on disease! Fair for smokers is fair for gays.

#42 | Posted by Diablo - HUSH YO FACE! gays can't help that they're gay...that will be their defense. DAYAM I wish I'd have followed up on my dreams to become a seedy lawyer like moder8.

Perhaps if the faggots were forced to wear a pink triangle we would know who they were and so avoid them and their pestilence.

Or we could round them up and send them to camps

#43 | Posted by nanc at 2009-10-17 10:55 PM | Reply | Flag: Christian piece of shit

"gays can't help that they're gay...that will be their defense."

Is being straight a "choice" for you?

Not a bad idea, betelg. Where did you get that one? Nice to see you are coming around to reason.
The trouble with a pink triangle is Morehead State might not allow it. Just tax gays more, as they do to smokers and drinkers. Make them pay for their diseases! It's only fair.

Diablo-
re: Not a bad idea, betelg. Where did you get that one? Nice to see you are coming around to reason.

That idea was from Hitler, and I was being ironic.

It's nice to see that you agree with Hitler on this one. (Irony again)

betel- ouch.

Or we could round them up and send them to camps

#45 | Posted by bruceaz at 2009-10-17 11:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

Well, you have to identify them first, and Diablo and Hitler seem to really like the pink triangle bit.

"That idea was from Hitler, and I was being ironic."

No, relly? Hitler? Gee, you must be so smart knowing something the rest of us did not.
And I thing you meant "sarcastic" rather than "ironic" genius....

Yes, "relly", and it's only you who are so ignorant, so there's no need to bring "the rest of us" in to cover your ignorant ass.

You being sarcastic, ironic or quaint, betelg?

Serious, dumbass.

You seem to think forcing gays to wear pink triangles is a good idea. This reveals you as either entirely ignorant of 20th century history, or a Nazi.

I'm betting that you are simply ignorant, giving you room to grow - but that's a charitable position.

You seem to be unable to detect nuance, betelg. When did I SERIOUSLY (as opposed to sarcastically) propose pink triangles, dufus? Are you at all human? Do you read any post with an eye toward someone else's humor?
You are pathetic. Grow up.

Diablo-
I'll let your posts - from which you now are backing away - speak for you.

Have fun with your new-found "nuance" and retroactive sense of humor, Diablo.

But I've got to give extreme patience to other matters now....

Later blog.

Okay, betelg. Run away and hide.....

i am an old fat diabetic smoker with the health problems that go with it. i have paid taxes and insurance premiums for decades and figure i may deserve a little bit of slack from today's society who wouldn't mind seeing us self-destructive bastards suffer. one thing for sure, i won't linger in a nursing home for years with pink lungs, strong heart and little brain activity. can't you see my ilk is saving society money by dying younger??

"So . . . if you're grossly overweight, and a group of bureaucrats say that you can't get a transplant . . . what would be a good moniker for such a panel?

#7 | Posted by rightisright"

the refrigerators of hospitals are not exactly overflowing with transplant organs. There are several people vying for each one. Who are you going to give the organ to some fat fuck smoker who has not changed his/her habits and will destroy the new organ or have some other organ failure or someone who lived healthy and was born with a defective hear or had pneumonia when they were a child for example?

Do you give a new heart to a 60yo geezer who smokes or a 25yo?

Very simple choices.

Currently made all the time.

Republicans would rather have it based on ability to pay. Not on who would be the best recipient. Amazing how everything is about money to a repub.

I like how the righties are still stuck in the early 80s. Fags are the only ones who get teh AIDZ, oh don't you know?

Republicans would rather have it based on ability to pay. Not on who would be the best recipient. Amazing how everything is about money to a repub.

#62 | Posted by jackass

We prefer to call it Darwinomics.

#64 | Posted by mysterytoy at

Seen the news lately? It's about to become extinct, phased out by evolution. Fitting name.

"Republicans would rather have it based on ability to pay. Not on who would be the best recipient. Amazing how everything is about money to a repub.

#62 | Posted by jackass "

Bingo. You got it. And the monkeys here like RisR crying about the fantasy "death boards" could never afford the cost of a highest bidder transplant operation.

how about parents who allow their kids to watch tv and play video games instead of having them engage in physical activities that will benefit their health? can or will that be monitored and penalized?

if we must penalize risky behavior penalize it all. anything that can cause injury or sickness. monitor people's activity and punish/tax accordingly.

'If you are fat unhealthy pig ---- why should the rest of us pay for it!'

this insinuates that us fat unhealthy pigs have not paid taxes or social security or insurance premiums. if you don't want us to use what we have helped pay for, make them quit taking money from fat smokers' paychecks.

or make a seperate tax/insurance system for fat unhealthy pigs so the thinner healthy folks don't feel screwed when fat unhealthy pigs use services

It's only common sense. ALL insurance has rates based upon risk. Life insurance premiums are higher for fatties and smokers....#20 | Posted by jestgettinalong

Sound economics, but lousy politics. And quit calling them "fatties" -- most of my family members are at least 50 pounds overweight, they're not happy about it, and they do not think this is something they have chosen.

Presenting differences in premiums as penalties for smoking or being fat is a non-starter. You might get somewhere by presenting them as incentives/rewards for meeting health goals, but probably need to demonstrate some willingness to help people do this. A good start would be to debunk the nutrition guidelines that were co-opted by the American Dairy Association.

"this insinuates that us fat unhealthy pigs have not paid taxes or social security or insurance premiums. if you don't want us to use what we have helped pay for, make them quit taking money from fat smokers' paychecks.

Obesity is the leading cause of most major illness. Fatties and smokers need this for thier own good. Yes you pay taxes and such, now the benefit is that someone is telling you that you're a fat-ass. I think that's just good service. It's a win-win!!!

Fatties and smokers need this for thier own good. -- #70 | Posted by BruceBanner

I often wonder how much smoking is self-medication. Doesn't nicotine bear some resemblance to stimulants used to treat ADD? I know my friends who still smoke all have classic ADD symptoms.

'I think that's just good service. It's a win-win!!'

would rather have the service i help pay for. don't have to be told i'm a fat-ass. i'm fat, not blind

high fructose corn syrup helps cause diabetes and is in everything, even bread. could the ban on this crap be include included in a health bill?

"high fructose corn syrup helps cause diabetes and is in everything, even bread. could the ban on this crap be include included in a health bill?

#73 | Posted by NOUVEAU_POOR"

Obama would shit himself as the mid-West is a big corn producer. He voted for corn subsidies for bio-fuel although it has a horrible return on energy investment as compared to sugar cane. I would be amazed if he pushed for restrictions on HFCS

Make no mistake -- Government run health care will penalize us all with higher taxes, fines, penalities on various sectors of society, long wait lines for treatment, rationed care and bureaucrat busybodies telling us what we can and can't do because "the government is paying your bills". Never mind that it is OUR money that the government officials have commandered to parcel out as they decide....

This is a power grab by Washington Democrats, nothing more and nothing less. It has absolutely nothing to do with delivering quality, timely and cost efficient health care to individuals in this country. All you have to do is look to where this has been implemented elsewhere and it is a disaster for the individual.

"I often wonder how much smoking is self-medication. Doesn't nicotine bear some resemblance to stimulants used to treat ADD? I know my friends who still smoke all have classic ADD symptoms."

That is an interesting observation, but with these things one has to be very cautious. The morning sickness drug Thalidomide caused horrific birth defects in the late 50's to early 60's. They later found that the synthesis process formed two molecules which were mirror images of each other (very common for biologically active agents) and only one of those caused the birth defects. Now Thalidomide is widely used to treat diseases such as multiple myeloma with a warning that it is not to be used in pregnant patients.

More than the nicotine, it is inhaling the burning chemicals which causes the danger. The nicotine mostly makes you want to keep doing it despite the ill effects on your health.

Don't fool yourself, if you get sick, then there are very very few diseases which can be cured. Most of the time, treatment involves treating symptoms until death, or cutting out the part of your body that is causing you most trouble (aka surgery).

I haven't heard of anything better for your health than avoiding obesity, regular physical activity (even walking the dog), and not smoking. Argue about whether or not the obese pay taxes or whether they should be considered disabled/addicted, but the science says you'll pay for it by dying of a series of avoidable diseases.

you're right kissntell there isn't much the government gets ahold of and makes better and cheaper and less of a burden to you and me.
and if there is a group that is politically bankrupt like smokers or fat people, it is irresistable for some to point to them and say 'you suck and therefore should pay more' for what they have already been paying for.
it can only get worse.

Doesn't nicotine bear some resemblance to stimulants used to treat ADD? I know my friends who still smoke all have classic ADD symptoms. -- Phoenix

That is an interesting observation, but with these things one has to be very cautious... I haven't heard of anything better for your health than avoiding obesity, regular physical activity (even walking the dog), and not smoking... but the science says you'll pay for it by dying of a series of avoidable diseases. -- #75 | Posted by BruceBanner

Oh -- absolutely did not mean to suggest smoking was a good idea. Have wondered instead how many smokers would be helped by screening for ADD and treating it -- whether with better meds than nicotine or with diet/behavioral changes.