Should overweight employees be penalized?

No - what’s next, ugly employees that scare off or put off or make an unfavorable company impression to potential clients - only blonde hair / blue eyed company reps - slippery slope indeed - excellent points by fillet.

Hey…some people might like fat strippers.

In my opinion, overweight people should not be penalized. I am living in a circle of many overweight people on largefriends.com and they all do excellent jobs. It’s unfair to penalize them just because of their extra weight.

This is a sippery slope.

The whole point of health insurance is to average the health costs among a group of people so that everyone can afford it. Are we also going to charge more for smokers? Women of child-bearing age? People who ride motorcycles? People who don’t exercise? Blacks (more problems with hypertension, diabetes, and heart dissease)? Redheads (more skin cancer)? People with a family history of cancer and/or heart dissease? Where do we draw the line?

Only if they’re strippers

I think over all the topic of health insurance, and those of whom use it, is the answer. As traditional health care providers have been for years; those that become members pay a small deductible & reap the benefits of the plans that consist of medical, eye & dental. As well as life and others.

In my opinion, should there be particulars surrounding costs selectively? Allowing the insurance companies to single out by means of categorizations? The answer is no. Despite the common argument that you have healthy persons that are essentially over-paying for costs being higher to insure those who have medical conditions or health issues are taken care of. Yet they deserve the same right of health insurance, under anti-discriminatory laws. Federal & State, designating a code of ethics that would monitor the amount of which they are allowed to be sectionalized. Such laws are not limited to simply employment, housing & medical. However, these are the most common. What is not always taken into account, is the vast amount of loop holes that give a certain extent of immunity to those companies that do decide to, but within the conditions of current laws & requirements, implement percentages to make an increase of their premiums, and also to apply these premiums to plans that are coordinated to fit the persons intended in select categories, such as those with pre-existing health conditions & or issues that would peg them as being overweight, heart conditioned, or what have you.

The main point is this, on one hand. How fair really would it be, to those that pay for the higher costs, and or use less overage, is it to be expected of them? I can see where they are coming from, but yet they do! A monopoly it is meant not to be, but a bureaucracy it very well is!

The Solution is simple. Allow those with pre-existing conditions to be fully covered, and pay the allotted affordable premiums of these benefits, with the option as well for future down grading of their plans, if conditions improve.

While at the same time, give those who only need limited amounts of health insurance, the option of tiering to a lower plan, and be allowed to upgrade if a condition crops up.

Here is the problem with this solution; Conditions of some may never get better, or may actually become worse. Thus because of this, there leaves an unknown variable that their plan may actually need to be upgraded higher. In the case of those with a per-existing condition, this could potential raise the cost of there or others health insurance. That would cause an unfair balance, and anger a many lot of people.

In the situation of those whom are healthy, the same issue would happen if they become severely ill. With all of that happening, a company, or the foundations of the health care system, would become even more shakier than it is right now.

This leaves no choice but to have a common basis. Health insurance is tricky here. Now, in other countries believe it or not, such as in the Europe health care system, consists of a free medical treatment system. Could we possibly learn a lot from other countries? I believe we could, and why is our pride and systematics not rendering a game plan for just that? Its just like our War. We can not pull out now…

Think about it… Do you think we would have as much crime and punishment in the United states? Do you think there would be as many Drunk drivers & murders/homicides, Etc.

A vast majority of our countries people are youth, thus a high rate of percentage is the cause of a lot of our issues, and if you look deeply in the heart of the matters. Our laws meant to protect, causing these youth to rebel, are a handful of reasons that our nation has the issues today. Now, I am not pointing fingers, and I am somewhat getting off the subject here. But, the fact still remains… Their are those who wish to take action, those who do not. Those who like to sit around and gripe, and those who make changes, those who see all around, and those who man have a more narrow view point. Either way, such issues as health care are both a sensitive & very difficult topic to discuss.

I firmly believe that that, although yes… There are many who purpose solutions, but we can NOT make everyone happy… There will always be those who are not happy with a given situation, thereby in that respect, there is really no solution. Only a medium. Again, should they single out one group. I do not think that is right, but also I do not think it is very fair of Healthy people to have to carry the burden; regardless that most of those with such conditions of no fault of their own, other that it is inherited.

While it is difficult to watch an semi-operative system at work, bare in mind there are always improvements and even disprovements, because not all of the purposed are good ideas, however we only learn by trial and error.

Other than that, this would be as close to an answer as I can muster.

Yes, quiet a few people like fat ones at largeplace.com.