Health Insurance: Some Rough Figures on the Cost of Degeneracy
I am in the process of getting insurance for myself for the first time as a self employed individual so after seeing the costs of an individual plan I decided to run some numbers for the hell of it.
Being a tobacco user means health insurers are allowed to charge me higher rates than no tobacco users. Okay, but why only tobacco users. Why not others who have higher risk behaviors?
Here are some figures I put together:
Let’s say there are 50,000,000 insured males in the USA at $350.00 per month. There are 1,000,000 in the USA infected with HIV. Let’s assume 500,000 are in the 50,000,000 insured. HIV medications cost approximately $12,500 per year, multiply that by 500,000 to come up with a total cost of $6,250,000,000. Now, 50,000,000 insured males times $350 per month is $210,000,000,000. Now we see that 2.97% of all insurance premiums based on the values I have used are being spent on HIV medication for degenerates, and this does not include the associated costs such as physicians visits and administrative fees. If we factored in those costs I think we would see that, based on my rough analysis, that HIV consumes over 5% of all health insurance dollars per year (based on the figures I have used for this simulation of cost).
Everybody wants to bitch about rising insurance cost, but no one is willing to dare touch what the root causes are, just raise it some more on the smokers. Everybody wants to talk about getting equality, until it is money, then it is all the straight white males’ burden.
Homosexuality (and needle drug use) is as huge of a monetary burden on insured people as the welfare class is on the backs of tax payers. Sexual degenerates need to pay their fair share.
A better magazine theme will make the blog looks nicer:)
It’s very PC to shun smokers. HIV positive is coddled. What always ticks me off is that smokers get charged more for health & life insurance while people that are overweight are costing more. Being fat can bring on diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease, kidney stones, gout, intestional ailments, joint problems, the list goes on and on.
From a constitutional/freedom perspective, smokers have become the most trod upon group out there. How can any city make a law of no smoking in restaurants? Shouldn’t that be up to the owner? What people don’t realize is that if the government can demonize smokers, they can demonize anything else they want. Watch out.
Obesity is much more costly, but there is a disparity in who it impacts, so that would be unfair.
The funny thing about outlawing smoking, which they did in bars and restaurants a few years ago here, is that all you could smell afterward for a few years when you walked by the bars that had opening walls of windows was vomit and stale beer, and to this day, you can still smell it occasionally when the air gets really hot and heavy. And yes, it should be up to the owners. It may not have impacted bars as much here in Chicago, but back in West Virginia it turned off a lot of neon signs.