If you throw in with these people you are either blinded by emotion or simply deluded.
There is no excuse for this.
Note that the proposal is to *tax* existing GOOD health insurance plans, ostensibly to prevent people from using too much health care.
How much is too much?
Note that the private insurers will pay a 6 billion dollar tax which the "public option" will not have to pay. How is that competition?
http://in.reuters.com/article/health/id … dChannel=0
"* An excise tax of 35 percent would be levied on insurance companies for health plans above $8,000 for singles and $21,000 for family plans. The tax would apply to self-insured and group-market plans, but not plans sold in the individual market. Threshold would be indexed for inflation.
* Health insurance providers collectively would pay an annual fee of $6 billion starting in 2010. The fee would be allocated by companies' market share."
By comparison, the most profitable health insurance company in 2007, UnitedHealth Group, earned 4.65 billion. http://www.nwfco.org/pubs/2008.0727_ins … profit.pdf
So, the plan is to confiscate (tax) enough of the private insurers to more than wipe out the most profitable company in the industry. How is that competition?
See what happens when someone reads the bill?
Nicomp, maybe they want everyone to have the same amount... What seems to really bother them is for anyone to not have any...
As long as they 'permit' a private option there's no way everyone can have the same amount. To penalize citizens for spending their own money on a quality health care plan for their family is unconscionable.
I thought health care was a human right. A moral imperative. I had no idea some people might have too much insurance.
When you tax something you get less of it. What's the legal limit for usury?
Nicomp, it's not a human right. It's just a commodity, like everything else.
It never was never about health care. It's about moral ambiguity.
Remember all thos hypotheticals meant to test how absolute your belief was in the proposition that stealing is wrong? "But what if your mother is dying, and you don't have the money to buy the medicine that could save her life? Would stealing be wrong then?"
It was all preparation for this!
It's about power, preserving and accumulating power at the federal level. Building a class of dependents that lean on the federal government for basic human dignity. It can't be about anything else when they sink to penalizing citizens for buying health insurance that's deemed too good. Tyranny.
by Grace Marguerite Williams2 years ago
Obama indicated in his promissory speeches that he would improve America? However, he has done nothing of the kind, in fact, he has made America much worse since his takeover in the White House. Do you think that...
by Peeples4 years ago
Curious as to what people who are against everyone having healthcare think should be done for those who really can't afford healthcare. What are the other options? Continue down the same road we are on now?
by My Esoteric3 weeks ago
One of the first things conservatives want to do is repeal the ACA individual mandate designed to get healthy people into the insurance exchanges. Without them, premium costs WILL skyrocket ... meaning "if...
by lauravan9 months ago
What, if any, role should the government play in determining individuals' adoption of health insurance? If you think everyone should be required to have some form of health insurance, why? If you don't think it's...
by backporchstories4 years ago
I know in my life, I can not afford health insurance until a job with decent pay comes my way. I have been unemployeed for eight months now and find work hard to come by in my tiny neck of the woods here in...
by trish10487 years ago
For or against?Personally, I hate the idea. The government needs to stay out of my personal life. I like my freedom of choice.
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.