smokers

@hawkeye10,

The actuaries decide on the numbers. They are marvellously non-political sorts in most companies.

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

The actuaries decide on the numbers. They are marvellously non-political sorts in most companies.

you would be on better ground if ObamaCare did not in so many places forbid pricing based upon actuaries take on good sense. when smoking is singled out as the only habit allowed to cause increase in costs, and allowed to be a whopping 50% premium, then we are looking at a fine. those who wrote the law we very clear that they intended to hammer smokers, they did.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Smokers cost insurance companies $$$
Smokers cost public health care plans $$$

The numbers continue to back it up.

In jurisdictions that allow premium determination based on lifestyle, smokers and drinkers are among the groups that don't get a discount.

It's pretty basic arithmetic.

Doesn't even take math to figure out.

2 Replies

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

Smokers cost insurance companies $$$
Smokers cost public health care plans $$$

On the other hand, smokers save the social-security and healthcare systems $$$ by dying younger. Are you sure their overall cost to society is positive?

1 Reply

@Thomas,

I'll go with the actuarial results rather than any guess I would make.

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

And what are the actuarial results after accounting for the benefits to insurance companies of people dying younger? Why won't banks give people a better deal on annuities if they tell them they're smoking?

1 Reply

As to the original question, I'm interested to see that the complaints about Obamacare seem to be changing from "I don't want it!" to "Why am I being left out?" If this is a trend, it's certainly an encouraging one.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Thomas ,
some insurance companies will give better annuity rates to clients with " severe "
medical impairments .
a client will usually require the services of a " specialty broker " who can negotiate a better rate for his client .
I doubt that banks want to go to the trouble of dealing with this - rather limited and risky - business .

1 Reply

@Thomas,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_annuity

Quote:

There are many different types of annuity[1] that one may purchase on approaching retirement. One such type of annuity is called an enhanced or impaired annuity.

An enhanced / impaired annuity is essentially a conventional annuity that provides a higher level of income to the purchaser. To qualify for an enhanced / impaired annuity, the purchaser’s state of health or medical history must be of such a state that their life expectancy is lower.

There are many conditions that would allow a person to benefit from better annuity quotes including diabetes, cancer and high blood pressure. Even lifestyle choices such as being a regular smoker or being overweight might enable you to get the best annuity quotes through an enhanced annuity purchase. Qualifying conditions could include: diabetes, cancer, high blood pressure, liver condition, heart attack, high cholesterol levels and Parkinson’s disease.

http://insurance.lovetoknow.com/Impaired_Annuities_Conditions

there is additional information available in google .

0 Replies

@hamburgboy,

Interesting, thanks! Now my universe is making sense again.

0 Replies

@pav64,

pav64 wrote:

Is it true obamacare will fine smoker $600 to enroll in the Affordable Care Act?

Why would you ask such a question? Did someone tell you that such may be the case?

0 Replies

@Butrflynet,

Butrflynet wrote:

I don't think you will find any insurance policy before or after Obamacare that does not penalize smokers with higher premiums.

In my recent copy of the 2014 edition of the BC/BS contract ( USA), no mention in the 202 pages of the contract is there a statement that smokers will be charged higher premiums.

0 Replies

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

Wouldn't smoking count as a preexisting condition?

First of all, smoking is a habit, not a condition. Additionally, pre-existing conditions, in the USA are not used for exclusion of an individual from enrollment in a health insurance plan.

If you don't pay your monthly premiums, you will be dropped from the plan, smoker or not.

0 Replies

@Linkat,

Linkat wrote:

Same should go in theory then with health insurance.

Life and health insurance are totally different. By the way, no where in my BC/BS ( Massachusetts ) health insurance does it say that smokes pay a higher premium . That means no where in the total of 202 pages.

1 Reply

@Miller,

I have to add, that if such a statement is not in the contract, in black and white, it doesn't exist. Consider that, if legal issues arise in the future.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

many people can not get cancer no matter what they do

I believe that thought was that smoking causes so many health issues even beyond cancer.

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

Also what about on life insurance - it costs the old folks much more money. Is that discrimination against the elderly?

Bascially (and I am not 100% on the obamacare aspect as I haven't seen the true numbers/calcs) - but the idea of paying more because you are a higher risk and more likely to cost more money should in theory be about non-discrimination as it simply should be what is calculated out mathematically and the higher rates should be determined mathematically. It isn't though, as there are just some select areas that are decided to be used. Smokers, for one - there are many areas that could be considered higher cost items, but are not considered.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

InsuranceLady wrote:

No, there is no fine for smokers, but insurance companies are permitted to charge a higher premium to smokers to non-smokers (a ratio of 1:1.5 or 50% more).

"fine" works very well to reflect the reality here, the fact that prettier words are used by many to hide the reality goes to show how honesty in conversation is getting hard to come by in America.

True, the idea is that people who take chances with their health should be charged more for the price of their care. The new law also imposes a 10% tax (fine) on tanning beds, too. If you are going to do something that will most likely give you cancer, then insurance company wants to make some money off of you before you cost them millions. I cannot wait until someone tries to put up a french fry and candy bar tax.

2 Replies

@InsuranceLady,

why dont we put all the billions spent on NSA to use and charge folks for all their risky behaviour?

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

why dont we put all the billions spent on NSA to use and charge folks for all their risky behaviour?

What "behaviors" in human life have no risk associated with them?

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know