Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Arizona: The New Republican Nanny State
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42379077/ns/health-health_care/
So Arizona wants to put surcharges on medicaid recipients depending on their smoking history, weight, or diabetes. In any other case they would call this social engineering, or the nannhy state. But I guess Republican principles go out the window when it comes to poor people. Screw them, they don't deserve the same treatment as the rest of us. |
Anonymous
| You're right that if a Democrat proposed it the right-wing crazies would be all over them for ushering in a nanny state. That said, I think it's a good idea (Republicans love to demonize good ideas lately - see "death panels") and hope AZ follows through w/ it. Doesn't sound unreasonable and sounds like an encouragement to get people to do things that are both in their own medical benefit AND cost savings drivers. |
Anonymous
I sort of agree with it. But while smoking is voluntary, weight and diabetes are not always so. Diabetes can be from birth, and certainly some people are genetically predisposed to it. And weight can be due to genetic and medical factors. So while you are encouraging good behavior, there are people who will pay a penalty for the way they were born. And remember, these are people who qualify for medicaid. They don't have much money. But the big problem I have is that they feel comfortable putting these restrictions on medicaid people, because they view them as "them", not "us". If such a fee came up that applied to medicare, they would be up in arms about it. And that is plainly hypocrisy. |
Anonymous
| Look, it is high time we taxed FAT and SMOKING. |
Anonymous
| And $50 a year is nothing when you consider the real costs. |
Anonymous
| Smokers and drinkers, fine. Overweight, no. Too many diseases can't be helped: diabetes, thyroid problems, overeating with depression. |
Anonymous
|
Can't people just lie about whether they smoke or not?
|
Anonymous
OOHHH NOOO, don't go there there is a huge thread on this already. Explain why Somalia has no thyroid problems or depression? |
Anonymous
But $200 a year in extra tax for people making $250K a year is enough to make them move out of DC, right? Excuse me, $250K in taxable income That's probably about $320K gross. |
Anonymous
You can test. But the cost of testing everyone would probably eat up the money generated by the smokers. |
Anonymous
Good point. THEIR $50 is nothing, even if they are poor enough to qualify for medicaid. But MY $200 is precious, even though I blow that on a steak dinner at Morton's. |
Anonymous
At school, we can smell cigarette smoke on the bookbags, hair, and clothes of kids whose parents smoke. When parents who smoke come to a meeting, we can immediately tell if they're smokers. We never say anything and wouldn't want to offend or hurt feelings, but we can tell. |
Anonymous
Well, there's really no point in fining people for something unless you plan to monitor whether they are doing it or not. SO I assume the republicans will have a plan in place to monitor whether people are smoking or not. Doesn't make sense to take their word for it! |
Anonymous
| How about if people are warned that if they get a cigarette related illness, and claim not to smoke, they will be tested before they receive any benefits? |
Anonymous
| My guess is that they will solve this big brother style. They will get the right to examine everyone's medical records. |