> Scott wrote: > > To me, that makes your suggestion unfair. If we should penalize someone for > smoking, why not penalize for genetic predisposition if they both carry > equal possibility of contracting a disease?
Because there's a difference between choice and no choice. Remember, we're talking about insurance. With car insurance if you get a bunch of tickets you pay higher premiums. Take me. I have a genetic predisposition to speed, but speeding is still a choice. If I get tickets or get in accidents (have claims!!) my rates go up. Same with home insurance. What you're suggesting is not insurance, it's just the government mandating that I have to pay for someone else's inferior choices - it's welfare. That's not necessarily a bad thing, and maybe we need that at least in part (like Medicaid), but I'd like an egalitarian system that gives me flexibility in how much I pay: If I work at good choices I pay less. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:298747 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
