Quote:
|
Merc is just thinking of himself as "young." :lol:
|
Quote:
duh duh DUHHHHHH And I get all scared and stuff. :unsure: |
Also, most of those aren't "consequences" "associated with this bill"; they're the present system.
|
The notion that "younger (healthy) people will most likely pay twice what older people pay" seems a bit far fetched to me.
As I understand the proposals, they include some form of community rating to spread the cost more equitably, probably lowering the cost of some older workers (and women) who have historically been overcharged. I dont see any scenario where younger workers will pay twice as much.....particularly since many older workers are more likey to have family coverage as opposed to individual.. |
Quote:
|
Ron Paul doesn't want his tax money to pay for abortions.
The Immorality of Taxpayer Funded Abortion* By Ron Paul Published 07/28/09 Quote:
|
Quote:
|
More people will be paying in, plus the taxes, for a start.
Of course the costs don't go away (unless access to health care earlier in life helps with preventive care). And to the extent that they increase under the new system, it would be instead of the current industry's preference for letting them die, and as such is a major part of the purpose of reform. |
Quote:
Money is fungible, and far more people support access to abortions than actually have them, so people can feel free to decide that any money going to abortions wasn't "theirs". |
Quote:
|
Quote:
If there are gaps in the public option, private insurance will be happy to fill them, as in England. |
Under the current patchwork of state regulations, insurance companies profits are based, in part, on a flat rate percentage of premiums. If they get 15 percent return on premiums, there is no incentive to lower those premiums, in fact, the reversal is true....increase profits by raising premiums.
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:09 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.