A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

Obamacare: Penalty on top of premium

Posted: Jan 27, 2013

"The Affordable Care Act — 'Obamacare' to its detractors — allows health insurers to charge smokers buying individual policies up to 50 percent higher premiums starting next Jan. 1. "For a 55-year-old smoker, the penalty could reach nearly $4,250 a year. A 60-year-old could wind up paying nearly $5,100 on top of premiums." Using their logic, there should be penalties on top of premiums for alcohol drinkers, overeaters, pot smokers, sugar lovers, coffee drinkers, etc., etc. Anything that 'someone' can accuse as being bad for you as an excuse to tax you more. http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Obamacare-Smokers-Huge-Penalties/2013/01/26/id/487522#ixzz2JDUzkeok ;

Who voted for this clown? - NM

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

probably about 75% of the posters - on this board did...

[ In Reply To ..]
wonder if any of them are beginning to find the koolaid a bit "bitter" yet. ha ha ha! :-) I surely didn't!

I don't smoke or drink (2 major causes of devastating - illnesses)

[ In Reply To ..]
So I'm fine with people who choose to ruin their health on my dime having to pay for it themselves.

My dime meaning high insurance for everyone when the smokers and the drinkers are getting more of the "pool" than those of us who try to lead a healthy lifestyle.

Regarding sugar and the other stuff. Food is a necessity, so IMO, consuming sugar etc., shouldn't result in a penalty. I'm not even crazy about the NY sugary drink limit.

Anyhow, I would support penalties on alcohol and tobacco plus a giant tax on top. This stuff kills people. Fine if someone chooses to kill themselves this way, but I don't want to be responsible for their hospital bills, chemotherapy, dialysis, organ transplants, bypass surgery, etc., etc.

Everyone who eats green beans will die!!! - -

[ In Reply To ..]
Should we have penalties on top of premiums for eating green beans?

car accidents kill people - should we not have to pay

[ In Reply To ..]
for somebody's inattentive driving habits, or put high taxes on automobiles because they "kill people"? come on! get real here "I don't drink...."

getting real. Cars are a necessity. Liquor and - tobacco are not

[ In Reply To ..]
Green beans have not been proven to cause cancer, heart disease or liver failure.

AND people who drive irresponsibly pay higher - insurance premiums

[ In Reply To ..]
and sometimes cannot even get auto insurance.

Irresponsible behavior, if repeated over and over, a pack a day, a 60-pack-year history, drinking until your yellow, should have consequence, should have some sort of consequence besides the self-imposed health consequence. I shouldn't be punished for irresponsible behavior of someone else.

but auto insurance premiums are raised - to everybody within a particular

[ In Reply To ..]
insurance company to help cover the cost of the one irresponsible driver...but we are all MANDATED to have insurance coverage to help cover the cost of the one irresponsible driver who may possibly kill someone...same is with health insurance. Cars are NOT a necessity. People can get along quite well without one. They are a luxury. I don't smoke and I don't drink either, and cannot stand people that do, but you can't take away their rights to do that, no matter what the health consequences of it are, and as long as there is health insurance MANDATED to us, we all have to help cover the cost of these seriously ill people. That is what the "insurance" is for and if we have insurance, we cannot dictate to the insurance companies who and what not to cover. That is THEIR option, not ours. anymore than how we can tell our so-called govt what to spend our hard earned tax dollars on. Basically you are saying that those who smoke or drink cannot be allowed the same privileges as those of us who don't. Glad I don't live in your world.

and as far as green beans not causing cancer??? well, that all depends on how they are packaged, what preservatives are used to keep them on shelves for a year, etc. Everything that is "processed" has some culpability in causing illnesses and diseases in the ones that consume them. Even the "organic" ones, still depends on how they were farmed, what pesticides were used, where they came from either because much of our food source is now imported from those dreaded third world countries and they have been known to contaminate our food sources for quite some time now, but covered up by our beloved govt. so it appears there are arguments against your arguments, as well. :-P

Did you just compare green beans to cigarettes? - RC

[ In Reply To ..]
What does that prove, exactly?

smoke 'em if you got 'em! - : )

[ In Reply To ..]

During tobacco hearings, Rush compared potato skins - to cigarettes because they have

[ In Reply To ..]
nicotine in them. THEY weren't addicting and killing people, therefore obviously cigarettes weren't either. He was good, carried me along, not as a believer, but an impressed outsider--until the end. Even he couldn't pull it off, although his Dittohead audience (still called them that and displayed his own book alone in an empty bookcase behind him) seemed to think he did.

I could have saved myself a fortune by now! - (smoke 'em if you got 'em)

[ In Reply To ..]

It's all about control - Thornbush

[ In Reply To ..]
The government decides your life for you from the moment you come out of the womb right up to the grave. Smoking and being fat are just excuses to discriminate against whoever does not conform to the government's standards. The government decides what your blood chemistry should be. Also, the government decides what you can put in YOUR body using "health" as an excuse. They OWN you. Welcome to dictatorship.

So you are saying that smoking and alcoholism - have no impact

[ In Reply To ..]
on health insurance? A person who smokes a pack of cigarettes a year for 30 to 50 is going to have the same health care requirements as someone who does not? Or someone who drinks a fifth of vodka a day is going to be as healthy as a nondrinker?

Do you want to pay for another person's bad choices?

I absolutely give leeway to diet since eating is a necessity and sometimes healthy eating is neither convenient or economical, but cigarettes and alcohol do not keep a person alive. It is not a staple of life.

My insurance premium should not reflect or subsidize those who choose to drink and smoke.

but your insurance premium does - and always will

[ In Reply To ..]
reflect or subsidize those who choose to drink, smoke, or whatever other poor choices they make in life. We cannot dictate to the insurance companies who and what to pay for. That is their choice. Our premiums are not put into an individual account with little check marks beside what and what we don't want to pay for, and the insurnace companies do not have to honor that even if it did. all monies from everyone all over the country are put into one big pool and the insurer decides who and what to pay for....not you, and our premiums are raised by every single incident that causes the insurance company to lose one single cent more than it is projected annually to earn. We don't have a choice. If you don't want to pay for anyone else's health problems...don't have insurance and cover only YOUR costs out of your pocket. 'nuff said.

But if placing a penalty, as in original post - stated,

[ In Reply To ..]
on smokers, specifically targeting high consumers of insurance payouts for a reason that is under the consumer who is smoking's control, might that not help the rest of our insurance from rising?

That was the point I was making, not that I don't understand the insurance pool.

targeting just certain people with higher premiums - for poor choices in life

[ In Reply To ..]
is not going to prevent the rest of our insurance rates from going up. and apparently you DON'T understand the insurance pool, or you wouldn't even suggest that.

The point is - MTMt

[ In Reply To ..]
It's not right to pick out one unhealthy behavior. A study done by Harvard last year showed that being sedentary is as big of a risk factor for cancer and heart disease as smoking and obesity. Two-thirds of the population fall into that category. Why do you feel it is ok to penalize one specific choice and not another that is just as detrimental and affects a larger number of people?

Smokers and people with obesity are more likely - to be sedentary. nm

[ In Reply To ..]
.

Chicken or the egg - MtMt

[ In Reply To ..]
Did the obesity cause the sedentary lifestyle or was it the other way around? Either way, your comment doesn't answer the question as to why it is ok to target one specific behavior and turn a blind eye to the rest of them.

Good movie to watch: - Atlas Shrugged

[ In Reply To ..]
It's scary how accurate it is.

it's an even better book to read - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
it's a shame that the conservative party seems to have coopted its message. When I read it, I was surprised it had not been banned by the right wing.

Why do you think - that? (nm)

[ In Reply To ..]
*

see message - ...

[ In Reply To ..]
because the story dealt with a very successful individual who was thwarted by corporate interests who stood to benefit from the protagonist's demise, who preferred to see the corporate status quo maintained, who blamed innovation for the withering of outmoded technologies, and who scoffed at science.

What was your interpretation of the novel?

see message - ZvilleMT

[ In Reply To ..]
I interpreted it as the threat of destruction of capitalism for the public interest, as in when the miracle metal is appropriated by the government for the common good. The main message to me, and I think, most republicans, is when profits and wealth and creativity are denigrated in society, they start to disappear - leaving everyone the poorer.

It's interesting, though, to hear your interpretation of it - thank you for sharing! Maybe we could tie politics in with a book group and start a discussion thread? It is really interesting to hear how different people read different things into the same book. If anyone's interested, maybe we could decide on a book?

it's interesting... - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
to my read, the metal was appropriated by the government not for the public good, but for the corporate good. The government sought to level the playing field among corporations because someone finally invented a better mousetrap and stood to gain from it - to the exclusion of the corporate status quo.

Kind of like the way big oil sabotaged the electric car, or the health insurance industry sabotages affordable care - all with the complicity of corporate interests who squelch innovation to protect their place on the economic ladder. This obstructs free enterprise.

You probably also recall from the book how science was removed from the public purview, as citizens were indoctrinated to believe that science was meaningless. That really resonates for me, particularly with respect to so many conservative groups who treat research like folly, and data like a numbers game.

Ayn Rand was a boring and pretentious writer... - English major

[ In Reply To ..]
...in addition to being a fascist and a hypocrite (she was critical of government benefits but received Social Security and Medicare Benefits under the name "Ann O'Connor). "Atlas Shrugged" is a poorly written homage to greed and has very little to do with how things work in the real world.

Agree she was a wee bit wordy but..... - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
I believe Atlas Shrugged speaks very well of what is going on today with govt wanting to take over and control as much of our lives as possible. Just my opinion.

I'm shocked! - vf

[ In Reply To ..]
that anyone could get past the first chapter of that boring book. There was nothing that grabbed or held my attention, so after about an hour into it, I started skimming through looking for something interesting. Finding nothing, I gave up and just read the "About The Author" section.

I sent for it during campaign: 1000 pages of small - print that I knew was going to irritate

[ In Reply To ..]
me no end because I'd read some of her nonfiction writings. It's in the bookcase somewhere. Didn't try to get past the first page. I'm not a fan.

(in your opinion) - philosophy major

[ In Reply To ..]

Thornbush hit the nail on the head - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
Also in Obamacare is the mandate that individuals who do not want insurance will pay a penalty if they do not buy it - forcing some citizens to buy something they do not want or need. Don't ya just love freedom!!!??

So... ya'll are opposed to gov-subsidized tobacco - and alcohol, but

[ In Reply To ..]
it's okay if nonsmokers and nondrinkers have to endure high rates to cover smokers and drinkers? How does that make sense?

For the record, I'm not for gov-subsidized non-necessities either, but I think some sort of consistency would be appreciated regarding views from the right.

If you don't want to pay for cigarettes and alcohol for others as a taxpayer, why would you want to pay for it as an insurance consumer?

I think the point of the original post - Dara

[ In Reply To ..]
is that Obamacare's hidden edicts are now coming to light. This smoker's penalty on top of premiums was hidden in the bowels of the bill and not discussed or debated, at least not in the general population. And there are sure to be more nasty surprises surfacing as time goes on.

I'm fine with that. This is a plus in my book. - makes complete sense

[ In Reply To ..]
At least insurance companies cannot deny someone insurance for a history of smoking or preexisting illness as result of smoking under ACA.

As for other nasty surprises, if they resemble this one, I'm not worried.

You give an inch, they take a mile... - MtMt

[ In Reply To ..]
Who knows where it can go or where it will stop if they decide to penalize people for bad choices. People who work in coal mines will at some point develop black lung. Let's penalize them for choosing to work there. People who work at a job where they are on their way home or to work at whatever time the bars close are more likely to get hit by a drunk driver. Should we penalize them? How about all the people who are hitting the bars and going home with a different person every night? HPV recently passed up smoking as the leading cause of oral cancer, so there should be a penalty for promiscuity. If you have a family history of cancer, diabetes, high blood pressure, mental illness, or any other hereditary condition and you *choose* to have children, who's to say they won't decide to penalize you? To the person saying they don't think people should be penalized for eating sugar because people have to eat, how many obese people are there in this country? How many of them are obese from choosing to eat processed, fatty, and/or sugary foods? How much does the health care for them cost in comparison to a smoker's? Seems the general consensus is that it's fine for the government to penalize a personal choice, as long as it's not one of my choices being penalized.

I have to admit... - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
I am not for the demerit system when it comes to healthcare. Perhaps it would be more reasonable to give people cost benefits if they maintain certain lifestyle or health parameters. I don't drink soda. I don't consume sugar. I don't eat meat. I smoke. I love butter. I drink wine.

I think people are diverse, I think healthcare is complicated, and I'm on the fence about demonizing certain practices over others. I understand it, though, and the distinctions are driven by data.

Agreed - MtMt

[ In Reply To ..]
They already tax the heck out of tobacco in my state, supposedly for the purpose of covering health care for people who smoke. Maybe a discount system would be better. Or maybe have a cumulative score so that maybe your healthy behaviors could offset some of the negative. It's just not fair to go after one group of people making bad choices and ignore all the other things that have been proven to have a negative impact on a person's health. For example, on certain days of the month, you can go to the grocery store and see people walking through there with 2 or 3 carts overflowing with high sodium frozen dinners and pizzas and soda. You can't tell me that people who eat like that are going to less of a burden on the health care system than someone who enjoys smoking, wine, and butter. And the taxpayers are paying for them to eat that way, so we actually get the burden twice. And before anyone flies off the handle, that is not to bash people who receive assistance. Just an observation about the ones who use it to buy nothing but unhealthy garbage. At least the evil smokers buy their own cigarettes.

My husband already pays extra for smoking. - RC

[ In Reply To ..]
He does it voluntarily, because he knows something bad could happen. He doesn't smoke cigarettes, but a pipe, and he doesn't inhale. But he still volunteers to pay the penalty and has for years, because that's what responsible people do...

So basically, this is nothing new to me, and I'm glad other people will now also take some responsibility.

Obamacare - vf

[ In Reply To ..]
Yeah, we should probably go with the other solution... the status quo. You know, the one where only those who can afford insurance should just keep paying high premiums to help cover the cost of the non-insured's emergency room visits.

As for the "using their logic" argument, it makes perfect sense to have people pay for their own reckless life choices; and truly logical people can agree on what those things are without adding coffee, pot, and green beans into the discussion.

Similar Messages:

Jan 20, 2015
Link: http://news.yahoo.com/video/obamacare-penalty-may-come-shock-151354373.html ...

Aug 17, 2016
Double-digit Obamacare premium hikes projected in 2017 may bode in Donald Trump’s favor, as several swing states are being impacted by double-digit increases under the law and consumers are expected to see the hikes around Nov. 1 — one week before heading to the polls. Trump has promised to repeal and replace Obamacare, but Hillary Clinton has vowed to make the Obamacare exchanges work. Some say the way she would do that is through raising taxes. “Any reports of premium increases will ...

Oct 07, 2016
last month the state insurance commissioner, Julie Mix McPeak, approved premium increases of up to 62% in a bid to save the exchange set up under the Affordable Care Act. “I would characterize the exchange market in Tennessee as very near collapse,” she said. Then last week BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee announced it would leave three of the state’s largest exchange markets—Nashville, Memphis and Knoxville. “We have experienced losses approaching $500 million over the course of ...

Jul 23, 2012
The NCAA says the Death Penality does not fit in this case. The FOOTBALL TEAM would have to be guilty of crimes committed while on probation. The FOOTBALL TEAM did not commit any crimes. Current and incoming football players are released to play at other universities if they so desire, or are now "free agents." I so agree with this. It is a shame that they will feel the affects of the punishment to the university, but there is no getting around it. It had to b ...

Jan 30, 2013
In 2014, people who choose not to buy insurance and don't quality for an exemption from the mandate will have to pay a fine of $95. The penalty increases to $695 by 2016, and then rises annually based on a pre-determined formula. Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/280117-obama-administration-implements-health-laws-individual-mandate#ixzz2JUiPOiaj ...

Oct 01, 2015
I know the system can be flawed. I know sometimes the wrong person is convicted of stealing, or whatever. But, when the penalty has escalated to the death penalty, any doubt, any evidence, no matter when it is found, nothing matters, it all should be considered and we should never put a person to death if there is any doubt at all. So many seem so eager and interested in the process that the actual cases do not really matter. This is such a vengeful society, at least when it suits. ...

Jun 26, 2017
We are stupid. Maybe Republicans are. But, there is no difference between paying govmt penalty from paying insurance company penalty, except....oh, yeah...the premiums are going to be higher for people that need insurance too...no subsidies based on income. We are totally screwed. http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/339488-senate-adds-penalty-for-going-uninsured-to-healthcare-bill ...

Jul 04, 2012
Poor Mitt. He was born with a silver waffle iron in his mouth. Proceed with caution. Readers are at risk for severe whiplash trying to keep up with the contradictions in this piece. It really gets interesting when he starts explaining why Obama's penalty is a tax and his tax (what he has called it on numerous past occasions when promoting his own plan) is a penalty. Though he can't even take a stand on his own positions, he do ...

May 27, 2015
xx ...

Jul 07, 2015
On the whole, Louisiana sounds pretty scary. Death penalty and the "depraved" crimes being committed. Of course, I would have interest in neither, so I idealistically am against the death penalty. I feel a little sorrow everytime a death penalty is issued and an emptiness when someone is executed in our state. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/louisiana-prosecutor-becomes-blunt-spokesman-for-death-penalty/ar-AAcFQRq ...

Dec 06, 2010
New York - On Monday, Dec. 6, a district court in Texas will be asked – for the first time in that U.S. state's history – to decide whether the death penalty is unconstitutional based on the "disproportionately high risk of wrongful convictions" in Texas. John Edward Green, Jr., the defendant in Texas v. Green, is charged in the fatal shooting of a 34-year-old Houston woman during a 2008 robbery. He has not yet been convicted, but prosecutors say they would seek the ...

Jul 16, 2012
Haven't made up my mind. I see both sides of the argument. First of all, so very many people will suffer who had nothing to do with the child sex abuse cover-up. In reading arguments for and against, perhaps it is true that the persons responsible and or involved in any way should be fired, jailed, labeled as sex offenders, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, ALL THE WAY TO THE TOP, and the football program should remain intact, as it is not fair to punish the ...

Dec 08, 2012
A Reminder of Obama and His Promises From His Own Campaign Reminder: The healthcare only passed because they changed the terminology of it from a penalty to a tax. Reminder: This video combines his campaigns from 2006(?) to the present. A lot of it everyone has seen over the years, but this has condensed all of it. Those of you who don’t want to believe he lied, don’t bother watching this video…but have a nice day anyway. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEJdhw ...

Jul 20, 2016
1) Have it collapse so that single payer can be implemented amidst the ensuing chaos. 2) Have that happen on somebody else’s watch. Obamacare was designed to fail so the Democrats could “reform” it with complete government provided socialized medicine. That is the entire purpose for it. Obamacare is designed to collapse so they can backfill the vacuum with government run socialized medicine. Eventually, everyone will be on some form of Medicare. I believe that was one of Bernie’ ...

Mar 31, 2011
Read the complete article: BTW it says Rasmussen is skewed. http://www.thisweekinsociology.com/?p=225 Here’s a guide to what those polls actually say, beginning with a discussion of the basic mistake which almost all the polls make. Most of the major national polls on Obamacare choose to report findings on what percentage of Americans support the health care reform and what percentage favor its repeal. This simple distinction, braking public opinion into big blocs, immediate ...

Mar 30, 2011
American people still are buying it. They are not as stupid as Bill Maher tells them they are. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law Health Care Law 58% Now Favor Health Care Repeal Monday, March 28, 2011 While voters still favor repeal of the national health care law, concerns that the law will force them to change their existing health insurance are lower than a year ago. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telep ...

Apr 14, 2010
ObamaCare, Death Star of the American Republic April 14, 2010 · 2 Comments A big h/t to beloved FellowshipOfMinds member FS for finding this extremely important and extremely frightening article. Remember what Nancy Pelosi said on March 10, which sounded utterly idiotic at the time? She said that “we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” It turns out Pelosi is not a moron. Au contraire, this woman knows exactly what she&rsq ...

Jun 03, 2013
Two thirds of Americans don't know if they will insure under Obamacare. link ...

Jul 11, 2013
I haven't exactly been able to figure out about the insurance. ...

Oct 03, 2013
So this is what I have learned. After listening about the new health insurance, this is what I know. There are 3 levels of care/cost. They are trying to get the young people to join to keep the cost down for the older people. Well after listening to a question and answer discussion on line program coming out of Sioux Falls, South Dakota hospital systems, it scared me greatly. If all the young people join this program, it will not help the older people who live on a fixed inc ...

Nov 04, 2013
Is Obamacare going to be overturned and when? ...

Dec 31, 2013
When discussing the ACA or Obamacare, whichever you call it, remember that it is literally like comparing apples and oranges (and grapes, pineapple and maybe even potatoes). Each state has different prices and different plans from the federal plan. Some states now have only one company offering a plan through their state exchange. Each plan has a different monthly cost, a different deductable and it goes on and on and on. The requirements are different from state to state ...

Jan 15, 2014
Just this week my medical reports have included: 1. A suicide attempt by a patient who was despondent over the hospital bills that had accrued last year (before Obamacare). Patient is still recovering from illness and was depressed about not being able to pay bills. 2. A patient who was uninsured who had probably suffered a ruptured appendix a couple of months ago (before Obamacare) and went untreated. Patient now admitted for an abdom ...

Feb 06, 2014
who said they wanted it to fail, but didn't think it would be this fast. Problems they thought they could get by with for a longer period of time are now blowing up in their collective faces, and it couldn't happen to a better bunch. ...

May 14, 2014
More deceit and wasteful spending. Why am I no longer suprised? Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/13/serco-employees-obamacare_n_5317800.html ...

Jun 08, 2016
We have got to get representative to abolish Obamacare, insurance is no good for healthy individuals and we end up paying for illegals as well as Medicaid recipients, it is just not fair for the working class. ...

Jan 06, 2017
For those MTs on here cheering the repeal of Obamacare keep in mind that many of your fellow IC MTs are on Obamacare currently and with health issues. They were unable to secure insurance prior to the ACA and today are covered for their health issues at an affordable rate. You write of soaring premiums under Obamacare but fail to take into consideration the cost of individual health insurance rates in your "free market." Those rates for me were over $1,200 per month for 1 ind ...

Mar 24, 2015
There has been a lot of going back and forth today about Obamacare and it seems there are a lot that approve of Obamacare and think its good for Americans. Some have said they have read the law pertaining to Obamacare. So for those of you that understand the law, and if it is so good for us then just why did our Congress and Senators and Representatives opt out of Obamacare? They continue to keep the insurance that they had previous to Obamacare. You know the insurance that they pay nothing for ...

Mar 27, 2015
Obamacare By The Numbers RELATED ARTICLES Daily Presidential Tracking Poll Costs Are Biggest Health Care Problem for Most, and Feds Can’t Help Voters Like Health Insurance But Not If It’s Mandated Voters Are Less Supportive of Government-Imposed Levels of Health Insurance Voters Complain More About Health Care And Aren’t Optimistic Sign up for free daily updates Thursday, March 26, 2015 President Obama yesterday celebrated the fifth anniversary of Congress&rs ...

Apr 02, 2011
Here's a simple question: Why on earth, after a year, are we STILL finding what's in it? How long is it going to take to find all these "little-known provisions? Transparency - the promise that keeps on breaking. ï»¿ï»¿ Uncovered: New $2 billion bailout in Obamacare By: Byron York 03/31/11 11:02 PM Investigators for the House Energy and Commerce Committee have discovered that a little-known provision in the national health care l ...