2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

One of the goals of our nation, its people and its government should be health.  And yet we see each day on the news, and as we interact with our friends and coworkers, as we walk down through the grocery store, or through the mall, that health and wellness truly are not the goal of many individuals, and we are all paying for those individuals in terms of higher health insurance premiums on ourselves, and in taxes for the uninsured.  Should healthy people be rewarded? YES, and those rewards would be extended to those who acheive wellness through lifestyle change and medication.  A person who reduces their weight, and stops smoking, but still experiences high blood pressure or diabetes, or high cholesterol, or all three, should be rewarded for treating these conditions responsibly with medication.  As long as the conditions are controlled through lifestyle and medication, their chance of experiences heart attack, stroke, and cancer is greatly diminished.  These are seriously expensive illnesses, it is the responsibilty of individuals to treat themselves appropriately to avoid these illness, and the responsibility of our government to provide the resources.  Both parties are responsible, not just one or the other.  But if an individual, who is capable of handling this responsibility fails to do so, they should not expect the same rewards of an individual that does.  In the end, their reward is good health and longer life, if monetary incentives (in the form of lower premiums) are what get them there, then everyone is better for. 

BTW,if health insurance companies preferred their membership to be ill, they wouldn't underwrite against it.

posted 3 years, 7 months ago
view in context

Just to get it out of the way, its important to state that Health Insurance Company profits are on average between 3-6%.  Many Health Insurance Companies are non-profit institutions.

The current proposals in congress will not work without mandated Health Insurance coverage for all people.  When healthy people choose to remain uninsured because of the belief that they don't need it, they reduce the pool.  Insurance is all about risk, and the pool of people and dollars to cover that risk.  If everyone carries insurance, premiums can be reduced.  When people and dollars are in the pool are reduced, premiums go up.

I also beleive that there need to be wellness incentives.  People that are of normal weight, do not smoke, have low LDL and high HDL cholesterol levels should be rewarded with lower premiums on their health insurance.  It is within the power of any person to acheive these health goals, and once these goals are acheived then their health will improve and expenses will decrease.

posted 3 years, 7 months ago
view in context