SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Lane3 who wrote (213524)7/26/2007 4:22:03 PM
From: KLP  Read Replies (2) of 794005
 
Since that's such a large group, and I believe the taxpayers pay already some portion of the premiums for this large group, it would seem to me the taxpayers could also choose to purchase insurance from the Government at the same cost as those who are currently in the program.

Is the Government group now called "socialized?"

You noted:

That, I don't recall us discussing. Of course, any insurance plan would have rates set by the group one is in. If you dictate an arbitrary rather rather than basing it on the actual costs of that group, then you're leaving the private insurance paradigm behind and more into something more like Medicare. If the non-employee group cost more than the employee group, which it probably would, then the taxpayers would have to pay the difference. I wouldn't think you would support something that is that socialized
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News