Seeing a fine 2nd career in the lifestyle enforcement game

There I was, minding my own business when the e-mails from colleagues arrived just minutes apart.

Not once did they consider their actions might be detrimental to my health. But by the "cough, cough" and the "charging extra for smokers" subject lines, they knew what they were doing would surely raise my blood pressure. Or send me outdoors into the first chill day of fall to smoke away my aggravation, and probably catch pneumonia.

The subject of the e-mail was a column by the South Florida Sun-Sentinel's Michael Mayo, detailing his employer's intent to charge smokers a $100-per-month surcharge for health insurance. Ah, so we don't really want affordable health care for all, but only for the righteous.

But if my colleagues saw a way to irk me, I saw opportunity. As I've passed the age of AARP entry and am approaching my leisure years, where I may -- or may not -- miss all those aggravating colleagues, I find myself pondering a second career.

I've considered smuggling for a number of years, imagining myself the Joe Kennedy of the 21st century. Smuggling cigarettes would be a good, steady job, what with the holdup of smoking citizens by their various governments. But smokers are only a quarter of the population.

We remain one of the most over-medicated societies in the world despite having the highest prices, though. With lower-priced Canada right next door, the logistics of smuggling Lipitor and Levitra and Celebrex seem less complicated. If millions of illegal people can just wander across the border, how hard can it be to bring in legal items?

Still, "bad lifestyle investigator/enforcer" is bound to be a growth industry. Smokers will be just the beginning. Then we'll move on to drinkers. Fatties. Non-exercisers. Fast-food junkies. Soda drinkers. Eventually, everyone will pay for health insurance and no one will deserve it.

But before then, someone will have to determine who is living clean and who is living dirty. Just because somebody says they don't smoke won't mean it's true. How will we know for sure that employees aren't sneaking a puff on the drive home or at home after a long, aggravating day at work? Somebody is going to have to investigate, shoot pictures, check purses, search cars.

And how will an employer know if an employee's dependent spouse is a smoker or not? Mandatory surveillance of every employee's car and home is the only way.

Or how about those who've quit, but fallen off the wagon, so to speak? Surely, they should have to pay for such failure. And how about the non-smoker who smokes only when over-served with alcohol or when he has a child? Shouldn't he get a double fee for doing two stupid things at once, or for setting a bad example for his new kid?

Then imagine how many investigators it'll take to measure beer and fast-food intake on any given football Sunday. It'll take pictures to prove a guy was sitting in his La-Z-Boy eating ice cream when he claims he was at the gym.

I'm just the woman for the job. I smoke. I used to drink and do fast food. I like ice cream and hate gyms, though I don't mind a good hike, all the better for my new job, which will no doubt require some tree-climbing and stealth. I know how to ask questions and take pictures.

So while my colleagues were thoughtlessly trying to harm my health, they may have pointed me to a new career. Lifestyle avenger. Or bad person catcher, if you prefer. The market is huge, the bad choices endless.

Dare I hope health insurance would be among the perks, given I'd then be among the righteous?