> don't carry an addictive So you acknowledge something is addictive (indeed, nicotine is one of the most addictive things there is, by some measures more addi

> don't carry an addictive So you acknowledge something is addictive (indeed, nicotine is one of the most addictive things there is, by some measures more addictive than most any other drug) -- but think that is a reason to penalize addicts? If something is really bad for your health but you choose to do it anyway, that's one thing -- but if we know how very very addictive it is, how very hard it is to stop doing it -- that's a special reason we should penalize addicts by charging them higher premiums? I still don't get it. (Presumably we should charge other kinds of addicts higher premiums too? Alcoholic? Problem with opioids? Those things will surely correlate with higher health care costs -- higher premium!) [I haven't smoked in 47 months. It was very very hard to quit].