Heavy people to feel lighter wallets with Alabama surcharge

[MasterD]

Heavy people to feel lighter wallets with Alabama surcharge - USATODAY.com

Pretty awesome experiment.

[silicon toad2000]

is there a fine line between a caring employer and the nanny state?

[Chris Cade]

Originally Posted by silicon toad2000

is there a fine line between a caring employer and the nanny state?

Perhaps.

However, from a strictly financial non-biased perspective this makes a lot of sense.

If obese people are, generally speaking, unhealthier, then it's in an employer's best interests to improve the health of their employees.

- Fewer sick days taken
- Fewer injuries (most relevant while at work)
- More efficient in labor/motion intensive positions
- Fewer serious illnesses, which ultimately cost insurance companies more. These costs get passed down to the groups and individuals purchasing insurance.

Also, a tangential benefit is that as the health of some improve, the health of others will improve due to peer pressure and environment.

That's just a few ways. As the article cited, they have an insurance policy which is free for those people who meet certain health requirements. This is the same principle that life insurance companies use to determine the cost of a policy - healthier people life longer, so the risk of death is lower, and therefore the cost of the policy is lower.

And the employees still have a choice. They can either pay the $25 / month, or try and get healthier so they don't pay the extra 'tax.' Or they can leave the state to go someplace that doesn't try to balance out the financial deficit created by an unhealthy lifestyle.

[funchy]

From a financial standpoint, it's no worse than charging 16 yr old boys higher rates for auto insuance than a safety-conscious 40 yr old mom. High risk is high risk.

However, that being said, they're targeting only weight and not other issues. One can be a chain smoker or a drug addict, but they won't be penalized? I also have to wonder who decides how heavy is "overweight"? Will diabetics who refuse to check blood sugar or ban sweet foods also be charged a surcharge? Will people with heart disease be charged more if they eat a meat-rich or fast-food diet?

What about the 225 lb football players that work out every day; by weight charts they're "overweight"?

I also know string-bean thin people who are lazy as sin. They'd get hurt lifting anything heavier than a TV remote.

I am "overweight" by the weight charts but I can carry two 45lb squarebales at a time out to the field to feed my horses. I've unloaded truckloads of 50lb horse sweetfeed by myself. I installed my own horse fencing. I work with 1100-1700 lb animals. Up until recently I was doing workouts at the gym 3-5x a week. So I don't agree with the idea that "fat" people must be inefficient, weak, or easily hurt.

[Chris Cade]

Originally Posted by funchy

However, that being said, they're targeting only weight and not other issues. One can be a chain smoker or a drug addict, but they won't be penalized?

The article said that the state already put in a penalty previously for smoking. This is the second "health tax" that Alabama has implemented.

And since drugs are illegal, passing a law against that would be redundant and hypocritical ("Drugs are illegal. BUT, if we catch you using them we're going to charge you $50/month)

On the other points - yes, health can't be arbitrarily decided by weight alone. I'm curious if BMI or other factors are involved to determine a variable scale for what a "healthy" weight actually is.

[funchy]

Originally Posted by Chris Cade

And since drugs are illegal, passing a law against that would be redundant and hypocritical ("Drugs are illegal. BUT, if we catch you using them we're going to charge you $50/month)

How about : if we catch you using them, no more free health insurance, welfare handouts, or government housing? (assuming of course there are rehab programs in place for those who do want help)

On the other points - yes, health can't be arbitrarily decided by weight alone. I'm curious if BMI or other factors are involved to determine a variable scale for what a "healthy" weight actually is.

My doctors have always just done BMI by using height and weight, nothing else. And using their methods, the BMI doesnt take into account light-framed people vs heavy. So it's not really any better than the Fed government weight charts.

I think there is still alot of debate about what a "healthy" weight is. Some studies think it's more important to be thin vs sedentary. Other studies say it's ok to be somewhat overweight as long as the person is fit & active. Which one is right??

[silicon toad2000]

It would be interesting to see the figures where they draw the line and exactly what they measure. The article states that it takes into account things like blood pressure and I'm guessing the obesity rating.

[MasterD]

With such things some people have a genetic advantage over others.

Further some people in worse health will get the insurance for free and people in better health will have to pay, because other factors than just weight will be more important.

You can't rule it all out.

Despite that, I think it is a really positive experiment.