It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

ObamaCare slams smokers with sky-high premium costs, could backfire

page: 7
33
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 04:47 AM
link   
This isn't Obamacare specific. Smokers already pay significantly higher premiums than non smokers. Between that and portions of tobacco taxes that go towards health care, it's not too far off to say our entire health care system is reliant on the extra costs smokers pay. They literally prop up health care for everyone else. I've heard several doctors make this same claim.

This isn't some evil Obama conspiracy, it's how the system has worked for the past couple decades.




posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 05:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 
It makes complete sense. Smokers get sick more (self-inflicted) so they should pay more. Where's the problem here? If they do't like it, then quit smoking. Easy. I quit, cold turkey, after two packs a day for 25 years. It was tough for a little while but I did it.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 05:32 AM
link   

Krazysh0t
reply to post by s4196606
 


What I'm getting at is that it is currently SOLELY just smokers who have to pay higher premiums. It's not like smoking is the only thing you can do to your body that is out and out harmful to it and causes medical problems later in life.
You have to start somewhere. Smokers seem a good start.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 05:55 AM
link   
wouldn't they make you prove everything?

like, yeah, i run 5 miles a day or i don't smoke?

smokers are a proud bunch! targeting them is racist.

bigotry at best.

we pay taxes all the time to a fund that pays for whatever happens to us.

right?



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 06:01 AM
link   
reply to post by IBelieveInAliens
 


Congrats on being able to quit a 2 pack a day habit cold turkey, you do have a right to feel proud about that. You really shouldn't assume everyone can do that though, most people can't. By the way, your dopamine levels will be lower than they should be for the rest of your life. This is one reason why I am against people saying smokers should have to 'just quit'. Should we force people to be depressed or at least not as happy as they could be? Ah, then again big pharma has some pills they can sell us.

People can quit smoking now without quitting their nicotine addiction if that is what they want to do. The risks of e-cigs or swedish snus are 99% lower than that of smoking. Since I'm all about protecting my health these days, I'll continue to use nicotine and protect my brain.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 06:20 AM
link   
reply to post by tsingtao
 


If you say you don't exercise, they'll tax you for being unhealthy.
If you say you do exercise, they'll tax you for risking injury.
If you file a claim and have any nicotine in your system (gums, patches, cig, e-cig, etc) when you said you're a non-smoking non-nicotine using individual, you're screwed.

It really comes down to all of us being screwed. Let's all bend over, because the gov really loves us. I'm so mad, my mouth is a box



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 06:26 AM
link   
I see people crossing the street to avoid smokers outside and generally scowling and making faces at them. Okay, it smells bad. I get that. What I don't get is why they don't pull their children across the street to avoid running automobile exhaust or really show any concern about that at all. If they are so concerned about their health they should be in a paranoid frenzy since every gasoline-powered motorcar is exhausting a massive plume of some of the most carcinogenic toxins known to humankind. You can't always see it, it doesn't smell quite as obvious as tobacco, but it's far worse. If I could sit in a room with a running car or a group smokers I'm going to take the smokers because I'll walk out of there feeling a bit sick, but still alive.

Of course the point has been made this is just an easy, cheap target to demonize and opens the door to intrusion on lifestyle judgment and division. There's no stopping it though. There is a crusade on smokers and it's only gaining momentum. As another user pointed out, it's not about the smoke anymore it's about the smokers themselves. They are now BAD people. They make an "unhealthy choice". So while it's been said it bears repeating again and again that it is wholly hypocritically and if tolerated will cascade until it affects each and every one of us.

It's even worse than all that though because it isn't just about being penalized for legal lifestyle choices for which there is alleged statistically probability but no guaranteed outcome. If you can be penalized and held liable for lifestyle choices then it will clearly become "necessary" for the government to know every single detail of your life so it may determine how you should be penalized for those choices.

Smoking tobacco is perfectly legal. It is already heavily taxed. Now people are required under threat of fine and/or imprisonment to purchase "insurance". If this is a required financial penalty for an action or choice it is indistinguishable from a fine or citation for a misdemeanor or other illegal activity. Through this system all manner of lifestyle choices are the government's business and subject to penalty which is hardly distinguishable from a tyranny where every behavior is monitored and punishable.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 06:47 AM
link   
All you people that used the PPACA and signed up for medicaid?

You just signed over your ENTIRE ESTATE, nothing, not one cent, to any of your children or family after you die.

It's a reverse mortgage on steroids and crack.

Google this:

www.google.com...=medicaid+after+you+die



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 06:54 AM
link   
reply to post by starfoxxx
 


LOl, you miss understood my post. Read down further after that one. Someone else did the same, guess I should have made it clearer.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 07:25 AM
link   

XTexan
My advice, don't sign up for obamacare unless you need it.

Pay the yearly fines, unless you don't file taxes, in that case don't pay the fines either.

If and when you get sick and need insurance, sign up then. They can't deny you coverage based on preexisting conditions, so don't sign up unless you need it.

From what I've seen of the premiums and out of pocket costs, especially with exchange plans you'll be filing for bankruptcy whether your insured or not if you wind up in the hospital for anything major.

Oh and when your out of the hospital, drop your insurance.
edit on 26-11-2013 by XTexan because: (no reason given)


NO, Do what I am doing claim to be Pagan, Jehova's Witness, 7th day adventist, mormon, or Buddhist and take the religious out. There are others too, a lot of them are Christian, just Google it. (I really am Pagan so I am using that and since it's such an eclectic religion some don't believe in Western Medicine like me for one) I do all that I can to prevent and heal my own health issues, if I didn't I'd be dead cause I have been Asthmatic my entire life and not one DR ever diagnosed it, but my best friend who knows about anything and everything medical she is the one who told me. No lie she could've been a DR had she been given the education and/or money for education to go become one she's smarter than 90% of the DRS out there!!!

There is NO FINE when taking a religious out and it isn't like they'll ask for your congregation and check.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 07:36 AM
link   

IBelieveInAliens
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 

It makes complete sense. Smokers get sick more (self-inflicted) so they should pay more. Where's the problem here? If they do't like it, then quit smoking. Easy. I quit, cold turkey, after two packs a day for 25 years. It was tough for a little while but I did it.

Look I've never smoked a cigarette once in my life, but even I'm not so ignorant of the experience that I can just assume that quitting is as easy as just not smoking again. It's great that you quit cold turkey without any help, my grandfather did the same thing. Not everyone is like you two though, and to say what you did in your post just shows a huge lack of understanding about it on your part.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 07:41 AM
link   

IBelieveInAliens
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 
It makes complete sense. Smokers get sick more (self-inflicted) so they should pay more. Where's the problem here? If they do't like it, then quit smoking. Easy. I quit, cold turkey, after two packs a day for 25 years. It was tough for a little while but I did it.



Smoked since I was 12 a pack a day, been sick maybe twice where I actually needed doctors not from smoking but from being in freezing cold temps taking buses to work and home late hours of night/early morning hours. Now that I have my own vehicle I get sick less than all of my coworkers that don't smoke ever did (And it's usually stomach issues not breathing or lung issues no flu or cold practically ever) And when I do I tend to be less sick than someone else and less amount of time in fact I've worked sick because it doesn't knock me down as badly as a non smoker. I am 41 years old had chest ex-rays in FL because of my chronic bronchitis that happened from the two times I had pneumonia in my life my lungs are still completely without a single dark spot they are clear as crystal.

I've since learned how to control on my own the chronic bronchitis from the web and friends who practice natural herbal healing and prevention. It has worked for the past 2 years. I am healthier than friends of mine with the same issues who see DR'S regularly.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Krazysh0t
reply to post by Caver78
 


Does this mean that the article on foxnews was confirmed? I was a little hesitant to post it since it was from FN. The fact that the 50% increase cannot be subsidized is even worse. If you smoke you HAVE to pay for your insurance, regardless of your income level. WOW!


You have a problem with it being from FoxNews, so is it safe to assume that if it were from MSNBC or CNN it would be more authoritative to you?



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 08:39 AM
link   
I looked it up and it seems Jehovah's Witness only have a problem with receiving blood transfusions and blood based products, but I think it's safe to say that if they sign up and refuse such a thing and doc deems it necessary they would still be forced to do it "for their health" or lose coverage which in turn will make them have to pay a fine, so I can still see some opting out if they believe they may be forced to receive blood. Also I meant Mennonite I didn't mean Mormon, there are Mennonites that don't necessarily live in Amish communities, we have some here also Christian Scientists and Scientology and faith Christians (snake handlers, etc) Native Americans get an opt out, all they need is like 15% of the DNA to be acceptable to put that down,



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 09:03 AM
link   

BanTv
reply to post by tsingtao
 


If you say you don't exercise, they'll tax you for being unhealthy.
If you say you do exercise, they'll tax you for risking injury.
If you file a claim and have any nicotine in your system (gums, patches, cig, e-cig, etc) when you said you're a non-smoking non-nicotine using individual, you're screwed.

It really comes down to all of us being screwed. Let's all bend over, because the gov really loves us. I'm so mad, my mouth is a box



My insurance company found out I have high blood pressure and smoke due to my DR. giving them the info. They have build in ways of drawing that info out.

Anyway I have gotten two letters from them stating in their own way that I had better get into a program that they recommend for healthy lifestyle schooling. If I don't I should expect my rates will go up though they didn't say that.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Pathogen
 


Well when it comes to partisan news, Fox can get pretty sensationalized. If this was a Republican bill and MSNBC was reporting the same thing, I'd be just as leery about it. I just wanted to cover my bases and not read too far into a story being reported by Foxnews.

Now if all three MSM outlets are reporting it, then I'd be more apt to believe it more readily.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 09:12 AM
link   
Insurance is the problem because it is a form of gambling.

We'd do better to outlaw it and rebuild our medical system or go to single payer.
If they'd open up the pharmacies I could do a lot to take care of myself, but as it was, when I got violently ill with no insurance, and no way to get any phenergan or fluids, I was forced to go to ER and face a huge bill or risk it. With the family just coming out of unemployment, I felt I had to take the risk.

But on one hand, they control the heck out of access to drugs.
Then they pretty much make you participate in the insurance gambling scheme if you are poor..
Trapped is what we all are, and they realized it.

If you smoke you are gambling with your health, but it's ok for insurance companies to gamble with your health.
We need to outlaw them and go single payer but everyone's too afraid to do it.

Since not all smokers die young, it seems stupid to me to target the group- it reminds me of when they took all the LDS kids because some abuse was going on in some families.

My mother died of lung cancer and she was a smoker. She didn't use much health care though. She got sick, she died. Maybe 5 days in the hospital total, and it was the medicine that killed her, it dissolved her stomach.

MY dad is pushing 80 and has always been a health freak. He goes to the ER if he sneezes. He brags about how he has such good coverage because he has medicare part a and b. "I can go anytime I want." They give him perks for being a frequent hospital stayer! But he's really rather healthy! He gets out every day and goes to flea markets, out to eat...he has a wreck once every 3-4 months, but hey, he's got full coverage! And all the running caused him to get bad arthritis in his back, and he had to have MRIs on his feet and expensive custom orthotics...it goes on and on.
He gets upset with family, he runs to the hospital, as if oh, if I'm in ER, they will come see about me. I quit that. 19 times out of 20 he's fine. The other time, it's his herpes.

But while we are taxing smokers to death, selectively, and have you ever looked at the rate of injury among cheerleaders? My friend's little girl got dropped on her head and had to have rehabilitative therapy for **4** years.
So while we are at it, maybe kids shouldn't play football and cheerlead.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 02:29 PM
link   

ldyserenity

IBelieveInAliens
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 
It makes complete sense. Smokers get sick more (self-inflicted) so they should pay more. Where's the problem here? If they do't like it, then quit smoking. Easy. I quit, cold turkey, after two packs a day for 25 years. It was tough for a little while but I did it.



Smoked since I was 12 a pack a day, been sick maybe twice where I actually needed doctors not from smoking but from being in freezing cold temps taking buses to work and home late hours of night/early morning hours. Now that I have my own vehicle I get sick less than all of my coworkers that don't smoke ever did (And it's usually stomach issues not breathing or lung issues no flu or cold practically ever) And when I do I tend to be less sick than someone else and less amount of time in fact I've worked sick because it doesn't knock me down as badly as a non smoker. I am 41 years old had chest ex-rays in FL because of my chronic bronchitis that happened from the two times I had pneumonia in my life my lungs are still completely without a single dark spot they are clear as crystal.

I've since learned how to control on my own the chronic bronchitis from the web and friends who practice natural herbal healing and prevention. It has worked for the past 2 years. I am healthier than friends of mine with the same issues who see DR'S regularly.


I have stayed off of this topic because people are so indoctrinated about smoking, and it's a huge lie. Most people have no clue that all those pictures of black lungs of smokers are the lungs of coal miners and guess what? All coal miners who spent their lives inhaling that coal dust have lungs that look like this! I put up this article a long time ago. It explains the lies involved about smoking. Sure I think smoking affects how well you intake oxygen at some point and can get COPD. But, smoking does not cause cancer in and of itself.

Why is it that countries with much higher smoking populations do not have the lung cancer rates we do? That is a proven fact. The real issue is the fact that America, England, France, Russia all knew radioactive material causes cancer. One small dust particle hits your healthy lung and you WILL get lung cancer. One small particle hits your skin and you WILL get skin cancer. This is called gross culpable negligence to know this and spew TONS of this dust up into the atmosphere via open air nuclear tests. They know cancer takes time, so they had to create a fall guy, and the natural fall guy is smoking!

People have smoked for centuries and not gotten lung cancer prior to the 1940's. Suddenly within a decade of it, people started getting sick. The government knew these facts. They even knew smoking did not give the rats lung cancer, but this dust did!

Read the FACTS. Scientists Proved Smoking Prevents Lung Cancer

Now, I know you all want to believe what I am saying is not true. That it's obvious anything you inhale will make you sick oh, unless you are a pothead, then that is good for you. Ignore the evidence, ignore the fact millions smoke in other countries much more than we do and don't get cancer. In 3 decades when none of us smoke in America, what are you going to blame then? This radioactive dust has a 50,0000 year life, so get used to it folks, we screwed our environment and the government has us blaming evil smokers!
edit on 26-11-2013 by UnifiedSerenity because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2013 by UnifiedSerenity because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Asktheanimals

Caver78
One thing everyone overlooks is TAXES.
Suppose everyone quit….your taxes would skyrocket since smokers are subsidizing all manner of things.


Yep, I was going to say smokers finance the SCHIP program in Virginia among other things.
We're talking tens of billions of $ in taxes here, not chump change.
Why are smokers the only group penalized? What about overweight people, people who drink, those who do extreme sports, people who travel a lot? They are all high risk.

As usual smokers are the only group they feel they have a moral superiority to.
So we get the shaft.
Thanks society!!!

I'll even do everyone a favor by dying earlier and costing social security less.
Can I get a thank you?
Thank you very much................Can I have you social security?



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 04:30 PM
link   

beezzer
Haven't read through the entire thread yet, but I'm sure someone already posted that lower income people are more likely to be smokers.

YAY Obama!
I wonder if you still get subsidies if you smoke?



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join