Should people who willfully refuse the vaccine pay higher health insurance premiums?

High risk premiums for those who willfully refuse? Yes or No?

  • Yes

    Votes: 21 56.8%
  • No

    Votes: 16 43.2%

  • Total voters
    37
  • Poll closed .

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd
Supporter
Sep 4, 2005
24,642
14,524
Here
✟1,196,009.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I think at a certain point, it would make sense to consider treating vaccine refusal similarly to how we treat smoking.

In most states, health insurance companies can charge up to 50% more for smokers vs. non-smokers.

And I think it's a win-win...

For months, we've heard the talking point (from those opposed to it) of "don't make me get the vaccine, go ahead and get it if you want, but let me make my own choice about risks and consequences"

I think it's time (now that vaccine supply outpaces the demand, so there's nothing keeping someone from making the choice to protect themselves) we agree to their request, but to require that their proposal has some substance, much like we do for those who want to accept the risks of smoking despite knowing the potential negative outcomes.

It's one thing to say "Let me make my own choices, and I'll deal with the consequences" (and then let everyone else in their insurance pool cover the healthcare costs after getting infected after attending a "Freedom over Fear" party), and it's another thing to for one to "put their money where their mouth is"


Thoughts?
 

DerSchweik

Spend time in His Word - every day
Aug 31, 2007
70,184
161,375
Right of center
✟1,879,104.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
FWIW,

The total population of the US is 332,690,850
The total number of COVID cases is 33,695,916 - that's 10.13% of the total population
The total number of COVID deaths in the US is 599,863 - that's 0.18% of the total population, and just 1.78% of those who test positive.
Vaccine effectiveness: 95% for the top two, 66% for the third

Source

Frankly, the fact that one's likelihood of dying if they contract COVID, not having been vaccinated, are just 1.78% of all people who contract the virus, and less that 0.2% of the total population as a whole, doesn't exactly strike me as justification for penalizing people for not getting a vaccine that is... at best 95% effective...

Point being... your chances of the vaccine NOT working (5%) are about 25 times greater (5%/0.2%)than if you did... oh, I don't know... nothing.
 
Upvote 0

DerSchweik

Spend time in His Word - every day
Aug 31, 2007
70,184
161,375
Right of center
✟1,879,104.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Your rant makes no sense. [Except for the vaccine part, I understood that.]

Context matters.
Meh - I got the gist of it. Not sure I understand your meaning of "context matters" though - in this context anyway.
 
Upvote 0

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd
Supporter
Sep 4, 2005
24,642
14,524
Here
✟1,196,009.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Not if the former is the goal of the latter.

If the former is the goal of the latter? Then what would the "elite" have to gain by that in your mind?

Like I said, if a rich guy kills off all of the non-rich, he has to clean his own bathroom, grow his own crops, etc...

What would they gain by that?
 
Upvote 0

Landon Caeli

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 8, 2016
15,455
5,824
46
CA
✟561,158.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I think at a certain point, it would make sense to consider treating vaccine refusal similarly to how we treat smoking.

In most states, health insurance companies can charge up to 50% more for smokers vs. non-smokers.

And I think it's a win-win...

For months, we've heard the talking point (from those opposed to it) of "don't make me get the vaccine, go ahead and get it if you want, but let me make my own choice about risks and consequences"

I think it's time (now that vaccine supply outpaces the demand, so there's nothing keeping someone from making the choice to protect themselves) we agree to their request, but to require that their proposal has some substance, much like we do for those who want to accept the risks of smoking despite knowing the potential negative outcomes.

It's one thing to say "Let me make my own choices, and I'll deal with the consequences" (and then let everyone else in their insurance pool cover the healthcare costs after getting infected after attending a "Freedom over Fear" party), and it's another thing to for one to "put their money where their mouth is"


Thoughts?

I disagree, because I think herd immunity is an unnecessary goal in this case. My thinking is that we can all choose for ourselves and call that good.

...If it's a money issue, regarding insurance rates, then that's over my head... :)
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: DerSchweik
Upvote 0

DerSchweik

Spend time in His Word - every day
Aug 31, 2007
70,184
161,375
Right of center
✟1,879,104.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
If the former is the goal of the latter? Then what would the "elite" have to gain by that in your mind?

Like I said, if a rich guy kills off all of the non-rich, he has to clean his own bathroom, grow his own crops, etc...

What would they gain by that?
Wow, you sure took that and ran with it, didn't you?

Let's try this again - If the goal of "controlling everyone" is ultimately to "kill everyone", then "killing everyone" and "controlling everyone" are not, as you asserted, "mutually exclusive."

Not sure how that translates to to a rich guy killing off the non-rich who cleaned his bathroom, grew his crops, and "etc."
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hans Blaster

Rocket surgeon
Mar 11, 2017
14,645
11,691
54
USA
✟293,955.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Pretty sure that qualifies as flaming. Might want to tone down the rhetoric a tad...

I think abortion is a rather unimportant issue. And it has *NOTHING* to do with insurance rates for the unvaccinated or any COVID issues at all.
 
Upvote 0

Landon Caeli

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 8, 2016
15,455
5,824
46
CA
✟561,158.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
My only question is *why* would someone want higher insurance premium rates for those who refuse the vaccine? I'm genuinely curious on the thinking behind this.

...I'm just not sure how it effects anyone else's life.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

DerSchweik

Spend time in His Word - every day
Aug 31, 2007
70,184
161,375
Right of center
✟1,879,104.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

Landon Caeli

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 8, 2016
15,455
5,824
46
CA
✟561,158.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
We're all going to have our final hospitalization episode at some point, so I don't see how there's any added monetary burden involved... In fact, if cutting all the visits in between actually saves money in the long run, then it could be considered a positive, monetarily speaking (only).

...And so if it doesn't make sense, then I have to believe the drive behind this is either ideological activism, or political grandstanding.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hans Blaster

Rocket surgeon
Mar 11, 2017
14,645
11,691
54
USA
✟293,955.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Its all relative. We contemplate how insurance premiums are raised on others across the board. Are there higher premiums for those who have risky sex just as we do higher premiums for risky drivers? Hows that compare to people who want to abstain from experimental vaccines?

And how would we know who is having "risky sex"? The risky drivers get pulled over and ticketed, should we check with the sex police?

(What is "risky sex" anyway? Sex without birth control? Because that's what prevents pregnancy. STD prevention and pregnancy prevention have things in common, but they are not the same thing.)
 
Upvote 0

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,036
13,062
✟1,077,118.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
FWIW,

The total population of the US is 332,690,850
The total number of COVID cases is 33,695,916 - that's 10.13% of the total population
The total number of COVID deaths in the US is 599,863 - that's 0.18% of the total population, and just 1.78% of those who test positive.
Vaccine effectiveness: 95% for the top two, 66% for the third

Source

Frankly, the fact that one's likelihood of dying if they contract COVID, not having been vaccinated, are just 1.78% of all people who contract the virus, and less that 0.2% of the total population as a whole, doesn't exactly strike me as justification for penalizing people for not getting a vaccine that is... at best 95% effective...

Point being... your chances of the vaccine NOT working (5%) are about 25 times greater (5%/0.2%)than if you did... oh, I don't know... nothing.
People have long haulers disease. Some have permanent heart and lung damage. When hospitals were overwhelmed people with otherwise threatening illnesses were endangered.
More deadly variants have appeared--and the only way to stop the variants is to stop the disease.
 
Upvote 0

sesquiterpene

Well-Known Member
Sep 14, 2018
732
611
USA
✟158,719.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
.
Point being... your chances of the vaccine NOT working (5%) are about 25 times greater (5%/0.2%)than if you did... oh, I don't know... nothing.
What a bizarre misuse of statistics. Whatever your chances of contracting the virus are, they will be reduced ~20-fold by vaccinating with one of the mRNA vaccines. It really is that simple.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Kentonio

Well-Known Member
Jan 25, 2018
7,467
10,458
48
Lyon
✟266,564.00
Country
France
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
FWIW,

The total population of the US is 332,690,850
The total number of COVID cases is 33,695,916 - that's 10.13% of the total population
The total number of COVID deaths in the US is 599,863 - that's 0.18% of the total population, and just 1.78% of those who test positive.
Vaccine effectiveness: 95% for the top two, 66% for the third

Source

Frankly, the fact that one's likelihood of dying if they contract COVID, not having been vaccinated, are just 1.78% of all people who contract the virus, and less that 0.2% of the total population as a whole, doesn't exactly strike me as justification for penalizing people for not getting a vaccine that is... at best 95% effective...

Point being... your chances of the vaccine NOT working (5%) are about 25 times greater (5%/0.2%)than if you did... oh, I don't know... nothing.

It'll never cease to amaze me how 4 American deaths in Benghazi caused the right to gnash their teeth and beat their chests for literally years, yet to the exact same group of people nearly 600,000 dead Americans just gets brushed off as 'It's just a tiny percentage, who cares' .
 
Upvote 0