So I'm a 30 something with 13 years of military service. I don't smoke, drink responsibly, and maintain a healthy height and weight. It's not easy, but I make the sacrifices I have to in order to be healthy. I'm in Air National Guard, and average just over 200 days a year on duty. Despite this, I have to pay for my health insurance. Meanwhile, someone who can't afford insurance but can definitely buy a pack of smokes everyday is rewarded for their behavior. Why is it they can get better healthcare than I can for making poor decisions? Why do I have to pay for their healthcare? They sure as hell don't pay for mind, I don't see them working out after a long day when all I want to do is spend time with my family. The days of getting your cake and eating it too and then taking everyone else's cake has got to end. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
I myself being an ex smoker agree smokers should be denied. Knowingly killing yourself and the people around you is not cool. I was blinded for years thinking I was cool smoking. Killing the people you love and yourself and then crying about how you have cancer is just wrong. You knew what you were doing when you sucked down a drag. It's also a massive drain on taxpayers dollars.
Just because we are privileged enough to have a system that is financially supported by a strong economy, which means we can have Medicare accessible to everyone does not make it a right. Smokers abuse this privilege, just because they might "need" it more they have made it a need through there own actions and their consent. As soon as someone makes that conscious decision to smoke they are forfeiting their access to this privilege. Smokers cause enough damage to everyone else's lives, and they also expect us to pay their medical bills, this is not fair and does not support the idea of an equal society.
People who take the contentious decision to smoke should not be given the privilege of Medicare. Yes you can argue that drinkers and overweight people would have to have Medicare taken away as well but, until the latter have been proven to be directly linked to cause cancer like smoking, they cannot be compared on the same level. Smokers are more than aware of the harm they are causing their bodies. So why should the government fund care for those who are damaging their bodies on purpose? What would be the point of treating a situation where the source of the problem would not be taken away? That would be like a diabetic getting a high reading when checking his or her blood sugar and then going to get a Big Mac.
Say you are quite poor and you break and arm from falling out of a tree, that has nothing to do with smoking but you still have to pay for private
so if you are denied access and you can not afford to get private medicare then you will have to live with a broken arm with also doesn't make the government or the country look good.
Smokers contribute much more of their income to the government through cigarette taxes, which entitles them to full medicare access. A society cannot remove privileges from one section of the community because of personal prejudices or a belief that they don't deserve it. That would be equivilent to sexism, racism and other forms of descrimination. If we prevent people from access to government funded healthcare because they smoke, what happens if they DID smoke years earlier but don't anymore? At what point would an ex-smoker be allowed the health benefits from medicare, is 12 months after quitting enough? If we start to ban people from accessing medicare because they smoke, then where will it end... Will we stop providing skin cancer treatments to people who spend too much time in the sun? Will we prevent people who are infected with HIV/AIDS from accessing healthcare because their own decisions and life choices may have contributed to them contracting the virus? Do we prevent pregnant women from accessing expensive obstetric services because they "chose" to get pregnant? Do we prevent people from accessing medicare when they are injured in a motor vehicle accident because it's believed they may have been intoxicated and driving? It's all basically the same thing.
If your denied medicare you should get a tax break for the same amount you are denied, why should you have to contribute your taxes to fund a bunch of non smokers? Many non smokers have genetical problems and all kinds of things wrong, why should a smoker have to pay for that? If you are denied medicare for smoking you should not have any more automatic deductions from any of your money to help pay for medicare, and medicare isn't that cheap anymore anyway
If I thought that smoking was that optional for those addicted to it, I still would think that they have the same right that any other other person has to get medicare. There are many people who do unwise behaviors that affect their health and they get medicare at 65 just like I did.
Yeah, I abhor smoking. My mother died at 56 from emphysema caused by smoking, She did quit 5 years before she finally died of smoking but many smokers are not able to quit.
Many people are overweight with the resultant bad health affect, but they have the same problems as smokers. If we got rid of smokers, then obese people would be next. Then people with diabetes because it's caused by sugar abuse. Then people who do dangerous activities like snow skiing, etc. Give me a break.
Less than 10% of smokers will ever have a lung problem. Less than 1% of those will get cancer. There are many environmental factors that contribute to lung disease and cancer.
Additionally, it is not government's job to punish us for our free choices unless those choices are a threat or danger to the rest of the people.
If we do not allow people who smoke to have insurance then we should also not allow people who drink to have insurance or people who are overweight to have insurance. There seems to be a 'crack down' in our society on people who are smokers, I think there is a limit on what should be allowed.
Smokers should definitely have access to Medicare. You can make a strong argument that they need it more than non-smokers.. Someone smoking should not restrict them to having a limited amount of health care services. Doing that would be completely unfair and cause a lot of controversy that isn't wanted.
Smokers should have access to healthcare just like everybody else! What do we have to gain from denying access to people who make unhealthy choices? It can be said almost everybody makes a degree of unhealthy choices in their life, so why pick on smokers? Besides, I see no evidence that it would get them to quit in the first place.