Fat Tax? It doesn't sound like it.

[tyr_13]

http://www.theroot.com/id/48533?GT1=38002

It seems that Alabama will start making state employees who don't take advantage of health screenings pay an extra $25. At first I thought this was about making big people pay more for health care, but that doesn't seem to be the case. It says nothing about making big people pay more, but people who don't go to the doctor. That makes more sense to me.

This article does however seem pretty angry with fat people.

 

[cwalner]

I for one would absolutely endorse a fat tax. I would love for the government to come and collect my excess fat and redistribute it to those who are suffering becuase they don't have enough fat.

 

[Modified]

Crap. I'm an Alabama state employee but I live in SW Florida. If I have to go all the way to Alabama for one of these free screenings, it won't be worth the $25.

 

[Careyp74]

Crap. I'm an Alabama state employee but I live in SW Florida. If I have to go all the way to Alabama for one of these free screenings, it won't be worth the $25.

Does that Alabama health plan you are on have doctors in Florida?

 

[shadron]

Crap. I'm an Alabama state employee but I live in SW Florida. If I have to go all the way to Alabama for one of these free screenings, it won't be worth the $25.

Pardon the derailment, but where the hell is SW Florida? I'd think it would be somewhere in the Caribbean, not so? Or is that Tampa Bay, which is actually east of mid-state? Living in a square state jades one's sense of directions so.

 

[ServiceSoon]

Somebody is already blowing the horn calling this measure discriminatory. If you take the proper steps to reduce your weight it doesn't appear they will charge you this fee. The only thing that is discriminatory is over-weight peoples' ignorance.

Personally, I am tired of paying higher health insurance premimums for lazy fat people. I got the short stick with automobile insurance when I was younger. Higher risk they called it. The insurance industry should be uniform.

I think the same logic should apply with seat belt laws. Don't make it a law for people to wear seat belts, just raise their insurance.

 

[Careyp74]

Personally, I am tired of paying higher health insurance premimums for lazy fat people.
I got the short stick with automobile insurance when I was younger. Higher risk they called it. The insurance industry should be uniform.

Well, the first sentence is against uniform insurance, but the second sentence is for uniform insurance. Am I reading this correctly?

I think the same logic should apply with seat belt laws. Don't make it a law for people to wear seat belts, just raise their insurance.

How would they enforce the extra insurance, put a question on the car insurance screener "Do you wear a seatbelt?"

 

[tyr_13]

Most skinny people do exactly the same thing as most fat people. Both are lazy. Some get fat from it, others don't. I don't think it is a good idea to punish people for having bad luck.

On the other hand, it makes sense to give people bonuses for proven healthy activities, such as routine exercise and participating in optional health programs. That is a much better way to encourage health in my opinion.

 

[Careyp74]

Most skinny people do exactly the same thing as most fat people. Both are lazy. Some get fat from it, others don't. I don't think it is a good idea to punish people for having bad luck.

On the other hand, it makes sense to give people bonuses for proven healthy activities, such as routine exercise and participating in optional health programs. That is a much better way to encourage health in my opinion.

Easy. Let's raise everyone's health insurance by $25, then give $25 to those that go to the screening.

 

[Modified]

Does that Alabama health plan you are on have doctors in Florida?

Yes, but I'm guessing these screenings will be a special case thing that is set up locally.

 

[Modified]

Pardon the derailment, but where the hell is SW Florida? I'd think it would be somewhere in the Caribbean, not so? Or is that Tampa Bay, which is actually east of mid-state? Living in a square state jades one's sense of directions so.

Tampa is a bit too far north.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southwest_Florida
For location descriptions, the panhandle is considered separate, just like the UP is in Michigan.

 

[ServiceSoon]

Well, the first sentence is against uniform insurance, but the second sentence is for uniform insurance. Am I reading this correctly?

The first sentence is an example of uniform insuracne that I am against. The second sentence is a personal example of non-uniform insurance. At the time I was against it. I was charged more for automobile insurance because I was young. If statistics show that younger drivers are a higher risk then it makes sense they should be charged more. What if the same report showed a correlation that dark haired people are more likely to be involved in an accident?

I am complaining because the health insurance industry is somewhat uniform while car insurance is non-uniform.

Why should it be different between the 2 insurance industries?

How would they enforce the extra insurance, put a question on the car insurance screener "Do you wear a seatbelt?"

Yes. It could be treated the same way as wood-burning stoves. If you have a wood-burning stove then you are required to tell your insurance agent. Most likly your rates will increase by $120 per year. If a fire occurs due to your wood-burning and you aren't covered then, well, you aren't covered.

 

[Modified]

I am complaining because the health insurance industry is somewhat uniform while car insurance is non-uniform.

If you buy temporary or other non-renewable health insurance then it is very non-uniform by age. When I was under 25 I paid less than the employee contribution under my employer's plan would have been for equivalent insurance (the average age of my employee group is quite high). From 25 to 30 it was close. After 30, no way. When my in-laws (mid-60s in age) came to visit for a couple of months, temporary insurance for them was extremely expensive.

 

[luchog]

If statistics show that younger drivers are a higher risk then it makes sense they should be charged more. What if the same report showed a correlation that dark haired people are more likely to be involved in an accident?

It's absolutely astounding the sorts of details that insurance actuarial tables will go into when not prohibited by law.

The only reason that health insurance isn't subject to the same granularity is
that it's prohibited from doing so by the fact that 1) it's typically paid for by a third party through a group plan which renders such granularity impossible (a similar situation exists with regard to "fleet" type auto insurance); and 2) it's prohibited by law from taking certain factors into account.

In the case of auto insurance, your premiums are often based not only on age and sex, but also on ethnic group, residence, type of vehicle, average weekly driving distance, and so on and so on.