• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

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

Discussion in 'American Politics' started by ThatRobGuy, May 15, 2021.

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

Poll closed May 22, 2021.
  1. Yes

    21 vote(s)
    56.8%
  2. No

    16 vote(s)
    43.2%
  1. trunks2k

    trunks2k Contributor

    +3,188
    Humanist
    Married
    US-Others
    It totally depends on your employer and health insurance. With some insurers you pay x% of the bill up to Y dollars, after which type insurance pays 100%. That Y dollars is on an annual basis, so every year, it resets.

    For our insurance, which is excellent, my wife pays a couple hundred dollars a month out of her paycheck for coverage. Her employer pays an additional several hundred dollars. While some employers may pay 100% of that monthly premium, they are few and far between (usually union jobs).

    We pay nothing at all out of pocket minus negligible copays provided we use a certain health system. That health system is very large and excellent so it's great. If using other health systems, the coverage is still well above average.

    We paid maybe $100 total out of pocket for the birth of our two kids, which included fertility treatment to have the first one. Most people get bills at least ten times higher per kid for that.
     
  2. Landon Caeli

    Landon Caeli But you can call me Captain Staff Member Trainee Supporter

    +3,930
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Others
    I think mine's pretty good too. I get a credit card that I can use to buy over the counter or prescription drugs.
     
    Last edited: May 22, 2021
  3. ThatRobGuy

    ThatRobGuy Part of the IT crowd Supporter

    +9,911
    United States
    Atheist
    Single
    US-Others
    I don't think it's ignorance, I think it's full-blown stupidity.

    Ignorance is simply the lack of knowledge or information.

    Stupidity is when one either A) has the information readily available and makes the choice to not factor it in to their decision making process, or B) does everything in their power to guard their ignorance. (either through confirmation bias, or entertaining some sort of conspiracy about why the facts aren't the "real facts")


    For instance, a person in the 1800s who decided to start smoking was simply ignorant. A person who decided to start smoking in 2005 would be stupid.


    In that particular realm, that's where I see the internet being a blessing and a curse.

    On one hand, we all have access to information easier than ever before. If one wants to look up data on any given topic, it's at their finger tips.

    On the other hand, it's also a treasure trove of confirmation bias no matter how wacky the theory is. You could think of the craziest theory you can imagine, search for it, and you're bound to find at least a couple hundred links supporting that theory.

    That's how you end up with people saying "i dID tHe ReSEarCh!...and <insert nonsense here>".

    With so much true and false information out there on the internet, you can have people conflating quantity and quality. A person could literally spend months and months on end reading links that came back in a search for "moon landing was faked", and then boast to everyone else "I've done hundreds of hours of research on this topic..."
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  4. TLK Valentine

    TLK Valentine You will be who you will be. We are our choices.

    +26,344
    Agnostic
    Single
    ...with an occasional dash of hypocrisy.

    I had to take a moment to reflect when someone I was speaking to -- who in the past had railed incessantly against illegal immigration -- said she was considering buying a forged vaccination card so she could go traveling abroad this summer.
     
  5. Trogdor the Burninator

    Trogdor the Burninator Senior Veteran

    +1,884
    Christian
    Well, if you had a government medicare system (a.k.a socialised medicine) there wouldn't be any difference in what people pay. There certainly isn't here.
     
  6. atpollard

    atpollard Well-Known Member

    585
    +281
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    All care is rationed in some manner. So changing the current system would come with some benefits and some costs.
    The problem is a general unwillingness to even have an honest discussion on what the real benefits and what the real costs would be. So Obamacare promised the moon ... and went bankrupt. The “Defund Obamacare” alternative promised savings and ignored the human costs. Anyone that offers a plan to change the status quo is a monster attempting to either kill people or destroy hospitals.

    Meanwhile the BUSINESS of Healthcare posts record profits quarter after quarter and my premiums rise faster than inflation EVERY YEAR.
     
  7. Pommer

    Pommer Autodidact polymath Supporter

    +4,408
    United States
    Deist
    In Relationship
    US-Democrat
    Good post so far!

    Oops, hello USS Partisanship!
    Okay, what is your solution?
    Or are you content with cursing the darkness?
     
  8. atpollard

    atpollard Well-Known Member

    585
    +281
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    There is no partisanship in my post.
    President Obama DID create an attempted solution that insurance companies withdrew from because costs far exceeded revenue and the system went broke. The funding model failed because the healthy opted out and the sick opted in creating a high need group with government regulated premiums and not enough tax dollars to fund the difference.

    When the Republicans took over, they only dismantled Obamacare without offering anything to take its place. So one side failed and the other side quit without trying.

    As long as there was gridlock, nothing was going to happen because neither side could allow the other side to claim victory and both sides benefited from the crisis as a political football.

    THERE IS NO GRIDLOCK!
    Whatever I personally think of the Democrat agenda or Nancy Pelozi or President Biden, they have all of the cards in the deck for the next two years. The Republicans had a similar chance and wasted it making sure billionaires got big tax breaks while ignoring Health Care. Now it is the Democrats chance to figure out what failed in Obamacare and fix it.

    They should start by examining which State systems work best (Hawaii has universal coverage, I believe) and build a National model from the best of the state models.

    If the party in power does nothing, then all of the incumbents need to be replaced with people who will get something done. The solution is for the voters to reject decades of status quo.

    And if the Government CANNOT do it, then the Libertarians are correct and we just need to stop funding failure. Go back to it being a local issue.
     
  9. Pommer

    Pommer Autodidact polymath Supporter

    +4,408
    United States
    Deist
    In Relationship
    US-Democrat
    No.
    Oh, they tried, but John McCain wasn’t going down the Trump train tracks that day.
     
  10. Pommer

    Pommer Autodidact polymath Supporter

    +4,408
    United States
    Deist
    In Relationship
    US-Democrat
    The crux of the problem is that money, (not constituents) is the motivating factor for all politicians.
    They need money to run their election bids. Then the money calls the shots and Congress is disconnected from what “the people” want and do the bidding of the donor class instead. This only works for about thirty years.
     
  11. ThatRobGuy

    ThatRobGuy Part of the IT crowd Supporter

    +9,911
    United States
    Atheist
    Single
    US-Others
    Yes, the hypocrisy certainly is a factor as well.

    ...there were many (who were against any and all covid restrictions) who seemingly took a sharp 180 with their reaction to the pandemic compared to their reactions to previous circumstances.

    "I'm not going to live in fear by wearing a face covering or distancing during the pandemic, you guys are just paranoid... now if you'll excuse me, I have to go to the gun store and buy 2,000 rounds of ammo, a Democrat just got elected"
     
  12. atpollard

    atpollard Well-Known Member

    585
    +281
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    That is OUR fault.
    Everyone that ever said we should "throw the bums out" and then voted to re-elect THEIR incumbent.
     
  13. ThatRobGuy

    ThatRobGuy Part of the IT crowd Supporter

    +9,911
    United States
    Atheist
    Single
    US-Others
    That scenario falls into the classic category of

    "Everyone understands the pitfalls surrounding that system, but nobody knows how to fix it"

    Obviously, with money injected into the equation, it muddies the waters...but on the flip side, if money were completely removed, then it introduces a whole new set of challenges.


    In order for people to learn about candidates, they need to get exposure to them. That type of exposure costs money to facilitate on a national and state level (which makes fundraising somewhat of a 'necessary evil'), however, with that fundraising comes potential conflicts of interest.

    So the choices are
    A) Be able to learn a lot about candidates (but there's a chance they may opt to please their financial backers instead of you)

    B) Minimal issues involving money-corrupting, but having to pick between people you know very little about (if you're not one of the fortunate few who lived in the same area as them or knew them personally)

    The latter also all but guarantees that only wealthy people could make a strong bid for office. The Bezos' and Musk's of the world could afford to run their own ad campaigns without taking a dime from everyone else. Most typical people with political aspirations wouldn't have that luxury.
     
  14. rjs330

    rjs330 Well-Known Member

    +3,189
    Pentecostal
    We are starting to go down the road of, if anyone does somethi g that is more risky in any way then they should pay higher premiums? You eat too many potato chips, or drink too much soda, eat too much red meat or ski, skateboard, ride a bike, or any number of other things that could put you at higher risk or illness or injury should pay higher premiums? Aren't premiums high enough already? What are the odds of a significant medical need?
     
  15. ArmenianJohn

    ArmenianJohn Politically Liberal Christian Fundamentalist

    +4,652
    United States
    Oriental Orthodox
    Single
    US-Democrat
    So you believe we should do away with tobacco surcharges (i.e. the extra insurance costs charged to smokers)?

    We have already started down that road and we're on that road right now. If you want to not go down that road you should be against tobacco surcharges - are you?
     
  16. ThatRobGuy

    ThatRobGuy Part of the IT crowd Supporter

    +9,911
    United States
    Atheist
    Single
    US-Others
    Risk is something that's calculated...everything you do/eat/consume/etc comes with some risk, underwriters and actuaries determine if those risks are significant enough to warrant higher premiums based on how likely, overall, a certain behavior is going to result in more expense, and how quickly those expenses will be incurred.

    That's why there are elevated premiums for people who smoke, but not for people who eat some potato chips or cookies every once in a while.

    As far as the odds of a significant medical need for Covid in particular...

    For last year
    Smoking related deaths: 480,000 (out of 34 million smokers)
    Covid-related deaths: 585,000 (out of a 33 million people who caught covid)

    In terms of hospitalizations between the two...I have to correct my earlier statement where I said they were on-par with each other, because they're not, Covid actually resulted in more hospitalizations over the last 12 months than smoking did.

    "there were an estimated 461,295 annual tobacco-related hospitalizations at a cost of $8.2 billion in the U.S."

    upload_2021-5-24_19-15-46.png

    Granted, the hospitalizations for smoking related ailments are largely in the form of cancer hospitalizations, which likely are more expensive than an average covid-related hospitalization (chemo and radiation treatments aren't cheap)...but none the less, 2.2 million hospitalizations is nothing to sneeze at.

    It's moving in the right direction, precisely because more people are getting vaccinated, which is why everyone else shouldn't have to end up paying elevated premiums for something we now know is easily preventable (or effects largely mitigated) with vaccination.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  17. loveofourlord

    loveofourlord Newbie

    +3,466
    Christian
    Private
    Anyone love the irony of those that hate the idea of universal health care because they will have to pay for all the fat slobs heart attacks, now whine about having to pay higher bills for not taking the vaccine.

    BTW that's what I meant before about socialism, the thing people here are wanting is basically universal health care where instead of each person paying for their bills, everyone puts money together so that it's spread out.
     
  18. Pommer

    Pommer Autodidact polymath Supporter

    +4,408
    United States
    Deist
    In Relationship
    US-Democrat
    Such are the dangers benefits of Objectivism.
     
  19. CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN

    CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN I'm praying for my dad to get well.

    +3,947
    United States
    Seeker
    Single
    US-Others
    COVID-19 leaves lasting damage to lungs. And causes other life long issues. So it will cost more down the road to a lot of people , that had Covid-19. Democrats tries to help lower insurance with people, that have a pre-existing condition. Which COVID-19 is.
     
Loading...