Slim Down or Pay Up

Posted on

Administrator Since: Apr 03, 2002

www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,414861,00.html

"The state is trying to solve two of its biggest problems health insurance costs and obesity in one fell swoop.

Beginning in 2010, Alabama, which has the second highest obesity rate in the country, will start charging all of its employees an extra $25 per month for health insurance. (Currently, single workers pay nothing; family plans cost $180 a month.)"


Interesting...my wife and I had this discussion lately as we were watching TV and listening to talk shows about the US obesity...now, I am not a small man, 6'4" 240(ish) but I am not obese...but we had noticed how big of portions are "normal" in meals, and how much it's filling us up the last year or two...we find out dinner plate sizes have actually increased about 2-4 inches over the last many years, soda bottles are bigger, super sized candy bars and crap.

While it seems nasty to weigh in employees, I see the logic, their health care is more and risk is higher.

I dunno, just found it interesting, I heard within 10 years every american will be overweight...based on obesity rate studies...

scary.

[ Back to Top ]


www.TheLondonProject.ca
Member
Since: Feb 07, 2005


Sep 02, 2008 11:07 am

Sounds like discrimination to me. Why wouldn't they charge anorexics $25 as well? What is the difference. Both are unhealthy eating habits.

They are trying something in Canada that seems better. Giving a tax break on your child's sports fees.

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Sep 02, 2008 11:12 am

Yeah, I knew somebody would say discrimination, didn't think it'd be you, but still...

I do see your point, but, statistics have proven that obesity is the #1 health problem and does result in much higher health care fees, that said, yes, we could have fees for beer drinkers, smokers, drugs users, etc...and then end up with a blown up department like the IRS...so many people needed to control stuff...

I like the sports fees idea.

www.TheLondonProject.ca
Member
Since: Feb 07, 2005


Sep 02, 2008 11:32 am

We have to pay a lot of tax on stuff like alcohol and tobacco already. This is where they make up for any lost revenue. Perhaps unhealthy food should be taxed more IDK.

Discrimination: ya, don't know how much I really believed it myself, just the first thing that came to mind.

They (US gov) really need to hit the fast food places hard instead. Them and the people that serve up a 1 lb slab of meat... IE: Outback etc. Perhaps portion control guidelines. There is a HUGE difference in that regard between Canada and the US. I ordered a steak when I was in Cali last and it was massive! I looked around and everyone's was massive. I couldn't get through 1/2 of it but others around me seemed to have no problem eating it all.

www.TheLondonProject.ca
Member
Since: Feb 07, 2005


Sep 02, 2008 11:35 am

oh...

The sports fees write off is awesome. It also helps lower income families get their kids into sports. This is thing the Canadian gov has been quite good at in the past. Mind you, we are still an overweight nation.

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Sep 02, 2008 11:37 am

Agreed,

[voice = Kathy Bates in The Water Boy]
Fast food is the devil!
[/voice]

Agree totally but, at the same time, fast food places don't force people to eat their stuff, going after smokes, fast food, alcohol, etc simply places the blame elsewhere, when it should be personal responsibility...

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Sep 02, 2008 11:47 am

Quote:
ya, don't know how much I really believed it myself, just the first thing that came to mind.


true, then you're just a troublemaker. :-)

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002


Sep 02, 2008 09:28 pm

OK, so I'm little overweight. Now I'm sad. :-(

I do agree on there being a need to get more control on the weight issue. I like the idea that BH mentioned about the sports thing. But there has to come a time when people just realize that being hugely overweight is simply bad. For me at 6' even and 230 = or - a few it is more a need to get more exercise. But at least I am aware of it. I suppose some folks simply don't give a hoot or they just don't think they can do it.

Funny enough is Ray who is my weight or very close at only 15 years of age is simply a big frickin kid. A little chubby but not fat by any means. But he does watch what he eats a lot more now. Especially since the chicks are starting to want to hang on him. So he is much more aware of keeping his weight down.

But ya, I suppose charging more for health insurance to someone who possibly can over come the problem is something we might see more of in the future.

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Sep 02, 2008 09:34 pm

me and noize may be a little overweight, but we can still mack on the ladies. :-)

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002


Sep 02, 2008 10:14 pm

Yep, I still look good.

Especially when I suck it in and hold my breath. :-)

http://www.reverbnation.com/2ndg
Member
Since: Nov 27, 2007


Sep 02, 2008 10:38 pm

simple rules, 8 glasses of water a day, min. dont over eat. and never eat complex carbs after 12 noon. just those 3 alone will make you lose weight.

If it doesnt, then your body isnt working properly and you need to get some blood work done. eg Viatimins and minerals test, liver function etc.

you'll never lose weight if the machine is out of tune.

Member
Since: Jul 02, 2003


Sep 03, 2008 12:51 am

LA is banning fastfood restaurants in South LA (California) as have other cities, now add this, I think it's all pretty funny in away. Back when they first banned ciggarettes in restaurants (not that I was against it mind you) I told my wife, wait and see, they'll start banning/controlling any thing and everything they deem harmful, including food, and so it starts. The trouble with governments is you give them an inch they'll take a mile every time and they aren't done yet.

Dan

http://www.reverbnation.com/2ndg
Member
Since: Nov 27, 2007


Sep 03, 2008 06:57 am

in a way its good. these fast food joints like mc donalds etc. are just ripping the public off. even if it is only 5 bucks for a value meal.

i remember seeing this thing a while back when a guy left a cheeseburger in the top drawer of his desk for about a year, and it still looked pretty much the same. just a bit shrunk. no mould no nothing.
now that my friends is criminal.
how the hell this S**t doesnt kill you on the spot, i'll never know.

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Sep 03, 2008 09:42 am

I dunno, if we start banning bad things, who makes the decision on whats bad...McD's isn't "bad" if you have one a month cuz you are in a hurry or something...granted it's not good, but it's not a health risk, and it's up to the person to make those decisions.

I just hate banning/controlling or whatever because it further removes personal responsibility fromt he equation...if people wouldn't eat there, they wouldn't be there.

That said, I hate it when I do go in there and see two fat parents with their three fat kids ordering happymeals...ARGH!

Member
Since: Aug 13, 2005


Sep 03, 2008 02:12 pm

I'm on a pork and fish diet!
Eat like a pig, drink like a fish:)



Veni, MIDI, Vici
Member
Since: Jul 02, 2008


Sep 03, 2008 02:54 pm

Quote: and see two fat parents with their three fat kids ordering happymeals...

That's their pursuit of happiness. LOL

Banning is never a good option. Doing that makes those things only more attractive. On the other hand I do wonder how else you can protect certain people from themselves.

www.TheLondonProject.ca
Member
Since: Feb 07, 2005


Sep 03, 2008 02:58 pm

Psssst..

Hey buddy, wanna buy a Big Mac?

Answer:On a good day, lipstick.
Member
Since: Jun 24, 2004


Sep 03, 2008 04:09 pm

The biggest concern for me would be where the line is drawn. Technically, at 6'4" and 235 lb. I am overweight. Now, I don't really look like I am (no real gut or anything), but according to the medical people I am a lardass. Does that mean that I'd have to pay the extra? If I were 190 lb, I'd look like an anorexic. As a large framed person I "should" be 181-207 lb.
At 17 - with a meth habit, I might have edged close to 200.....Not pretty.
So where is the line drawn? Who is overweight? Aside from the obvious obese people, there's a gray area to be defined.

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Sep 03, 2008 04:12 pm

at 6'4" I believe our ideal weight is about 200 lbs...but I think the better judge is body fat index, body mass index or whatever the hell it's called not really "weight".

That said, I'd be pretty happy down around 210, I've gotten close before, but always manage to pack a few more on.

...damn beer...

Byte-Mixer
Member
Since: Dec 04, 2007


Sep 03, 2008 04:17 pm

Oh God, but BH has just reminded me of those old McDonald's comics from PLIF. :P

The church of Ronald:
"The beef shall set you free."

-jbot

Answer:On a good day, lipstick.
Member
Since: Jun 24, 2004


Sep 03, 2008 04:18 pm

Right, dB-Wan, but if you were 210, you'd be fined...Is that fair?

Answer:On a good day, lipstick.
Member
Since: Jun 24, 2004


Sep 03, 2008 04:19 pm

Deleted By TallChap

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Sep 03, 2008 04:22 pm

Well, that depends exactly what the threshold for fining is, however if there is a distinct line that they can prove ups the cost of health care, well, I understand, perhaps not be happy about, but hey, I have to pay more for bigger cars I can fit in, have to pay more for bigger clothes sometimes, you know...

Chief Cook and Bottle Washer
Member
Since: May 10, 2002


Sep 03, 2008 05:24 pm

This is primarily crap in my books. Are you ready to have your children geneticly screened had have their work potential and medical costs determined by their genitic risk factors? Do we want insurances to cover only "perfect" people? There is a hell of a lot of debate regarding weight vs health. To base insurance benifits on a weight/height ratio is over simplistic. It's simply one more example of greed in health care.

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002


Sep 03, 2008 08:26 pm

I know several 300 pound dudes who lived or are still living a long and healthy life. And a couple of them I played flag football with for years. Let me tell you, not all obese people are un athletic, these guys could run down any jogger I know of, and squish em when they caught em.

But I degress, this crap of banning is really foolish. As dB stated it is something that will just get out of control in the end.

Chief Cook and Bottle Washer
Member
Since: May 10, 2002


Sep 03, 2008 08:47 pm

Banning is insane. In most cases it makes the banned substance more desirable per it's "intrigue" factor. Then you get to pay your government for one more thing to police. Give me a break! We've got the Sunday morning booze pigs, too tall grass pigs, park on street pigs, snow removal pigs, underwear pigs, and now burger pigs! Lost Angeless has a gazillian gangs running around popin each other and their worried about caloric value of a burger? Their entire population spends 50% of their time in some form of rehab and they got pigs sniffin out evil frys? Move the border north and give it to the Mexicans.

Time Waster
Member
Since: Jan 12, 2006


Sep 04, 2008 12:06 am

As long as they apply their $25 fee to:

Smokers: cigs, pipe, cigar, chewers
Extreme sports enthusiasts
Obese people
Underweight people
Dopers
Motorcycle riders
People with high blood pressure
People with high cholesterol
People with DNA susceptible to disease
Drinkers
Partiers
People who drive Pintos
Sedentary job holders
Dangerous job holders
People with multiple sex partners
Gays, lesbians, sexual deviants
Joggers on highways
Surfers
Hikers

Too many...


Czar of Turd Polish
Member
Since: Jun 20, 2006


Sep 04, 2008 01:19 pm

I'm not gonna read it all but... if you smoke you can pay more as it's high risk. Being morbidly obese is also high risk. Dung beatle has a good point though.

Prince CZAR-ming
Member
Since: Apr 08, 2004


Sep 04, 2008 01:51 pm

I view it as risk management.

I wouldn't want to invest in a company that doesn't do any risk management, so why should a insurance company be told not to do the same thing.

They already do the same thing, with other questions.

If the risk is there, and it's provable, then I don't think it should be ignored.

As far as government banning things, then no, I don't agree. People should be allowed to make their own crappy decisions. But if they have to pay more for insurance, they shouldn't complain.

Which brings up another angle: someone that eats the same amount, but is overweight compared to a person that is slim. That's hard to oversee and police, i'd think.

www.TheLondonProject.ca
Member
Since: Feb 07, 2005


Sep 04, 2008 02:34 pm

Biggest problem I see is where do you draw the line. Driving a car is pretty dangerous so do you ban driving? IMO it is way to much power for government to have.

Prince CZAR-ming
Member
Since: Apr 08, 2004


Sep 04, 2008 03:33 pm

I don't think the OP was stating anything being banned. Just costs assessed for risks.

People that drive sports cars pay a much higher premium for insurance than a person driving a little 4banger.

The risk is higher, ergo, premiums are higher.

Seems like basic business sense to me.


www.TheLondonProject.ca
Member
Since: Feb 07, 2005


Sep 04, 2008 04:27 pm

pjk: yes of course... my mind was wondering off topic.

...carry on

Related Forum Topics:



If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.