Should fat people have to pay more for healthcare?

Should fat people have to pay more for healthcare?

Other urls found in this thread:

news.cornell.edu/stories/2012/04/obesity-accounts-21-percent-medical-care-costs
journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0050029
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Nobody should be forced to do anything. Should be a private decision on an individual basis between the doctor and the client.

Should pro athletes pay less or none?

Yes

Yes and they do. Just like smokers pay more.

they should be forbidden from buying cheap food

This should be illegal. The doctor should decide the price

Daily reminder that anything else is socialism

The doctor doesn't insure you and pay when you have a heart attack at 42.

The real question is whether lard eaters violate the NAP by assaulting our eyes with their abominable appearance and nose by assaulting our nostrils with their poor hygiene?

Should we be allowed to order one of our child concubine war slaves to blast lard asses with a bazooka in sight?

Should they be hunted for fat collection to make soap?

>should unhealthy people pay more for healthcare?
Yes

The doctor doesn't insure or pay you at any time?
The doctor quotes how much your healthcare will cost. The doctor can voluntarily choose to bill you more for a condition such as smoking, eating, etc. The doctor can do what they want. Anything else is literally statism and statist control over what should be a free market.

Don't they? Honestly asking and am uninsured myself.

In this way, doctors will specialize in seeing clients that are overweight or smoke. These clients will go to these doctors because they quote less. These doctors will become more skilled in dealing with these clients. Suddenly, there are advances in medical knowledge of obesity and lung cancer that would never arise from nanny state intervention "just say no" because these people have lots of practical experience dealing with smokers, the overweight, etc.

No, but in societies that utilize social health programs, they absolutely should

Doctors are the reason these fags are on health care in the first place

Socialist doctors
The trouble with socialism is suddenly the doctor has an incentive to get people hooked on drugs, because there is no longer a freedom of voluntary association with a particular doctor.

No because they are likely to break
They should pay as much as fat people

holy shit you are absolutely backwards
In our current system the doctors have an incentive to push drugs on people. There are actually drug company salesmen who go around giving doctors free perks.

Half the doctors i see in the US are obviously trying to extort my insurance for as much as they can by giving me all sorts of crap.

Should fat people pay more for plane tickets?

> Bigger load -> Consumes more fuel -> Higher price

Well gee, it's almost as if that's the point I'm trying to make, because our current healthcare system is socialized

If they physically occupy more than their own seat, they should need to buy more than a single seat

What I'm saying is the inspecting doctor doesn't insure you. They collect the $200 for the check up and that's it. I agree some doctors are crooks.

Yes and anybody who says different should be thrown from a helicopter. I've been convicted of a DUI, why should I have to pay more for auto insurance?

No. Obamacare literally forbade this.

No. They should have to pay more for food.

Solve the problem at the source.

Yes. With rare exception, it's a choice to be fat.

First post best post
Why is it so hard to understand
Why does everyone wants to force someone else to do something
They shouldn't he FORCED to pay more, but neither should I be forced to pay more because of them

I think they do? I thought I read that somewhere

No. Healthcare should be completely unavailable for fat people until they get their weight down to within a set limit. Let them fucking die.

thin people should pay more since they can afford it because they eat less

They can and do. Even if you can cram yourself into a seat if you get complaints from your neighbors that you're invading their space they can toss you.

They should, but most fat people are some combination of women, minority, or impoverished, so it'll instantly be shotdown by activist judges for unfair discrimination. Any attempt to do so would be framed as the White Patriarchy oppressing vulnerable womyn of color, and being fit will suddenly become subtly racist.

Yes, just like all other kinds of insurance, that's why a couple entire professions, like actuary even exists.

But ultimately insurance is always a net negative. We only have health insurance so young healthy people share the bills of the boomers.

However without it young people would blow all their money on expensive toys and not willingly put away 12k a year to build a nice chunk of money for care when they're old.

Also the medical profession does a horrible job of being efficient, correct, or letting you know what the cost is before they service you.

Yes. Greater preventable risk of injury and diseases should be punished by higher insurance costs.

They will end up paying more over their lifetime because they get more illnesses.

Should smokers pay more for healthcare? Should asthmatics pay more? Should allergics pay more? Should lame pay more?

They all pay more in the long run.

Are you talking about health INSURANCE or health CARE? Why can't people understand the difference between them, ffs?

How do they know you smoke? Why do people admit this ??

nah healthcare should be universal and it should cover the same things for everyone. if youre a massive pile of fat, your doctor should be treating you accordingly, giving you the proper diets, fat removal surgery, exercise and etc. if your medical history shows you didnt follow the doctors advice - go into a ward where they strictly control everything until you are fit again and have a reasonable routine, or lose coverage of related high risk diseases.

I'm 300lbs and I go to the doctor about once a year. I never take medicines at a drop of a hat like most people. Why should I pay mroe when the World is full of genetically inferior retards who constantly have to go to the doctors to cure their shitty genes that would have been wiped out by nature?

Serbia

YES
YES
YES

Yup, my company has a $50 per paycheck tobacco surcharge to get onto the company insurance. I'd be ok with the fats having to pay a $50 surcharge as well.

I don't smoke, weigh 170lbs at 6'1", and haven't been sick in the past 3 years. Why should I pay as much as a fat shit who gets sick on a monthly basis?

Hell, if the deductible weren't so god damned high, I'd have the cheapo plan the company offers, but it's more worth it to have the more expensive plan with the low deductible.

Bc if you were found to lie it's called fraud and you can be denied coverage...also it's extremely easy to hear if someone smokes when using a stethoscope listening to someone's lungs.

No, they are already cheap, since they die earlier. And on top of that no pensions etc.

Former airline reservationist here. I can't remember getting a call about booking two seats but we were trained to offer it.

Heck that Ruby person who had a reality show was over 700 lbs at one point, couldn't fly at all for long distances because she can't fit in the bathroom. When she was over 300, they booked a private plane for the tv crew and she took Immodium before flying so she wouldn't have to get up (does it work for peeing, too?). She sat next to her skinny relative and it seemed to work out even though she took up half his seat.

>giving you the proper diets, fat removal surgery, exercise and etc

Just give them DNP, problem solved.

THEY SHOULD CERTAINLY PAY MORE FOR AIRFARE.

you are all imbeciles
how the hell would you enforce this?
>fag doctor charges 20 more for a consult because you are fat
>literally hundreds of other doctors willing to do it at market price
>fag doctor loses patients

Yes. Just like a heroin addict should have to pay because he is killing himself, a fat person is doing the same thing with food.

/thread

I would gladly blow my money on expensive toys let me tell you

>I'm a healthy fat person

r u havin a genocide m8

But there are fatties and smokers who don't go to the hospital.

I think the insurance price should be decided by how often you go to the doctor. Like with car insurance - the more you crash, the more you pay. That would be fair.

>But there are fatties and smokers who don't go to the hospital.

There are, but they're statistically more likely to use more healthcare. Going with the car insurance thing, there is a statistical reason that men under 25 pay more for car insurance than women under 25, or men and women over 25.

>But there are fatties and smokers who don't go to the hospital.

They are not the majority.

It's scientifically proven you are more like to be sick if you're fat and smoker.

They choose to be like that, they need to pay more

But not all of them go to the hospital when they get sick, that's my point.

Or insurance could only cover a certain number of hospital visits in a year. You go above that - you pay for it yourself.

>all these doctor and insurance shill threads

Reminder while these businesses fuck you out of money for pills, hospital visits and surgery those glorious fat fuckers are siphoning the money back in free care.

Jewry is a double edged nose.

No.

Fat people die early and end up costing way less over their lifetime. The most expensive part of your life is the decade or two you spend old and decrepit. Fat people never get there, and so die.

This has been verified numerous times by studies.

A quarter of our healthcare costs come from obesity-related illness.

news.cornell.edu/stories/2012/04/obesity-accounts-21-percent-medical-care-costs

I don't know where you got the idea they don't go to hospital?

Also why did you mention hospital? Why not regular doctor? Or missing work when they are sick? Or practically forcing family members to take care of them thus making whole families less productive?

The obese should have to pay with their lives.

That studies two years worth, not their lifetime costs.

A fatty who takes 3 years to die will have higher healthcare costs in those three years, sure, but the lifetime medical costs of someone who takes 25 years of slowly circling the drain to die will be much higher.

Just look at the life expectancy of fatties and non-fatties. Fatties die 6-14 years earlier, and they die a lot faster.

they should have to pay more for food

Also
>a quarter of healthcare costs come from obesity
>35% of people are obese
Makes me think.

Fatties don't die at the age of 10 so you can say they die quicker, they die at the age of like 50-60, they cost shitton

Yes

Assuming fat person desires to get a healthcare? Yes.
But here's the deal that can make this arrangement mutually beneficial: company provides a discount for a fat person, if he or she agrees to pay for more expensive healthcare deal and goes on a program to lose weight under the medical supervision.
Essentially: pay more than a healthy person at first, but if you agree to loose weight - pay less.
Everyone wins. Fay person becomes fit, insurance company secures it's financial resources and gets a healthy, loyal client and good press.
It's just an idea though. I don't know if it's viable in the real world.

You're objectively wrong.

>With a simulation model, lifetime health-care costs were estimated for a cohort of obese people aged 20 y at baseline. To assess the impact of obesity, comparisons were made with similar cohorts of smokers and “healthy-living” persons (defined as nonsmokers with a body mass index between 18.5 and 25). Except for relative risk values, all input parameters of the simulation model were based on data from The Netherlands. In sensitivity analyses the effects of epidemiologic parameters and cost definitions were assessed. Until age 56 y, annual health expenditure was highest for obese people. At older ages, smokers incurred higher costs. Because of differences in life expectancy, however, lifetime health expenditure was highest among healthy-living people and lowest for smokers. Obese individuals held an intermediate position. Alternative values of epidemiologic parameters and cost definitions did not alter these conclusions.

journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0050029

You see Amerifriend, in the civilized world we have this thing called universal free healthcare, no one "pays" for healthcare, the state does it.

I haven't seen anything that suggests that. If you add in the productivity decline and the opportunity cost of those missed years, the cost savings would have to be substantial to even things out.

A quarter of healthcare costs are from obesity-related illness. Those 35% are still incurring other, non-obesity-related, costs.

This is relatively amusing. You're arguing that day people should pay a lower insurance premium even though they cost more per year of life to provide care for. They aren't alive to pay premiums or taxes after they die their premature deaths, so any "savings" for the government or insurance company provider is irrelevant.

>If you add in the productivity decline and the opportunity cost of those missed years
Why would you do this?

If your rationale for making fatties pay more for healthcare is that they cost more in healthcare then opportunity cost and productivity cost is irrelevant. You'd need a broader based argument - that fatties should pay more for healthcare to make up for the cost to society that they are.

Unfortunately for you this has two implications:
1. that people "owe" society a certain amount, and this argument can be used for E V E R Y T H I N G. "Rich people should pay more because they owe society more because..." etc. etc.
2. that there is a base level of contribution that can be objectively defined as the obligation of every citizen, and that anyone not meeting this - fat or not - should be taxed higher or whatever your plan is. What about people who exceed it? Should they pay no taxes at all? There goes 99% of government revenue.

In short to go for the broader base is retarded.

>A quarter of healthcare costs are from obesity-related illness. Those 35% are still incurring other, non-obesity-related, costs.
Actually, they aren't. Not as many, anyway. Why? Because they die earlier. That's the point. The savings that occur when the most expensive part of someone's life - old age - is cut short is significant enough to offset the additional costs of obesity.

>They aren't alive to pay premiums or taxes after they die their premature deaths, so any "savings" for the government or insurance company provider is irrelevant.
Are you retarded?

If it costs less to provide healthcare for a fatty over their lifetime than a healthy person then every fatty is an overall saving to the government healthcare purse.

Insurance is different depending on how each insurer structures their fees, exclusions, whatever.

Even if they did, you wouldn't be satisfied. You don't want this because you want fairness – you want it because you hate fatties, and because it would make you feel good to see your contempt for fat fucks given some sort of legitimacy in law. It's no different in concept to SJW tumblrtards trying to get their hatred of white people represented in law by pushing for higher taxes and prices for whites. They appeal to emotion to get people on their side, you appeal to people's wallets instead.

They should unquestionably pay higher premiums for insurance. Their health care costs more per year they are alive.

Their cost to the government is different, less obvious, answer. You would have to take deduct the potential tax revenue your losing from them dying early, as well as the lower tax revenue because of their lower productivity during their working years. I suspect obese people are a net drain on government healthcare.

I would be satisfied. There's no legitimate reason to exclude a person's weight as a factor when calculating premiums.

Do it like Japan, give them a trial period to lose weight. If they don't, tax them.

This is fair

There's no legitimate reason to exclude a person's racial inherent privilege as a factor when calculating taxation.

Way to not answer any of the questions I posed, genius.

Insurance is a long game. The insurer is basically betting on your healthcare costing less than your premium over your lifetime. If fatties have lower lifetime healthcare costs _____________ (fill the blank).

Protip: the right answer is that their premiums can theoretically be lower than healthy people and still be profitable because their lifetime healthcare costs are statistically lower.

HOWEVER, this would require the fatty to be with the insurer their entire life. That's pretty unlikely, and the chance of any one insurer getting suddenly stuck with a high bill on a new fat customer is potentially higher than healthy people. This can be factored in with a joining fee or whatever, and isn't unique to fatties. As healthy people get older the same applies - and the switching fee would need to be proportionately higher because they are proportionately more expensive.

>Their cost to the government is different, less obvious, answer.
Only because you are obfuscating it to avoid being wrong.

Fatties cost less in health care and therefore should pay less for their healthcare.

>but muh cost to society
That's not at issue here. The question is posed about healthcare. If you want to talk about societal burden then that is a HUGE discussion in which fat people are a TINY part. A fatty who works is a far smaller drain than a permanent NEET or a mentally ill person. Why should the fatty be taxed more for being LESS USELESS than a NEET (who receives bennies) or a mentally ill person who can't work at all and is therefore impossible to punish with taxes?

You're basically saying everyone less useful than a fatty should be sent to gulags to have their obligations extracted from them.

>fat is a choice
So are a lot of things far more crippling than obesity. Gulags for all of them?

Your position is either logically untenable or cartoonishly Stalinist.

Yes. It is a major risk factor for heart disease.

I don't know how it is in Serbia, but in Lithuania private doctor visits are not covered by health insurance, so you have to go to the hospital for free shit anyway. And if you miss work for being sick, you need to get a note from a doctor that you had a valid health issue to miss work, that means going to the hospital again. And if you decide to miss work just because you feel crap - you get fired.

this
fuck you socialists

Thinking about it, both fat people and pro athletes serve the same purpose within a society - to create entertainment.

Never need to go to the doctor so prove me wrong, faggot

>I go to the doctor about once a year.

I've not been to a doctor in 8 years.

That's how often a healthy person should be going.

no that's just your shit health care you shit government has

i agree, but fatties like Boogie and chain smokers demand we healthy responsible humans pay for their trashy habits

This is an inevitable conclusion and my main problem with UHC.

Eventually you have people going up to fat people and smokers who are angry at them for living unhealthy.

Burger is my right as an American citizen, literally. To take away the right to be a fat pig will begin to erode other rights, slowly but surely.

Should gay party fags who take 50 loads in the ass a week and do hard and illicit drugs have to pay more?

>No, say liberals.

Should someone pay more if they practice a certain religion?

>Of course not, say liberals.

What if the religion is the white people in the south who handle snakes.

>Now the libs are confused.


This leads down a dark path. Insurance should be like $80 for every of age person in America.

I don't think you understand how insurance works.

You pay per month you are insured. Even your own statistics show that obese people cost more per month of life. There is no scenario where a fat person could have lower premiums and still be profitable through their life.

Your laughable "lifetime equation" only makes sense if people were to pay a flat rate for lifetime insurance coverage, which they don't.

Lose some weight, m8. You'll notice your quality of life will get alot better.

Why would you need to go more often?

Cough: Get better on it's own
Flu: Get better on it's own

Those are the two major things people catch on a yearly basis.

The only reason I went last year was I had a burst disk in my spine and needed vallium and codine.

Of course. That's how insurance works.

>obesity isn't correlated with hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, back injuries, mobility problems, arthritis, etc

You should get blood work done every year and a physical to check for preventable diseases, m8.

Why the fuck would you run to the doctors if you're not ill?

People doing that is why it's always so crowded. Only go to the doctors when you're ACTUALLY ILL with something that wont get better by itself.

Absolutely.

They should have to buy two plans and two seats.

That's usually a good policy, but you should get a yearly physical. Alot of cancers and chronic illnesses can be prevented if detected early enough.

don't pro athletes usually pay for specialized insurance or themselves for specialized personal care if it's related to their sport? Aside from injuries from their respective sports, which would presumably be paid for by them, they are likely to be much healthier than the average person.

Now recreational athletes are another matter. But I think the studies show being an athlete carries a much lower risk than fatties. Even skateboarders may break limbs, but fatties have constant ongoing health issues.

My policy is basically this: If I'm ill and haven't collapsed then I'm not ill enough to go to the doctors. If I am ill enough to collapse I'll be rushed to the hospital. That's when they'll detect whatever cancer I have.

Yes.

I guess an early death is more convenient than a few hours a year at the doctor's.