Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (353437)	10/3/2007 2:13:47 PM
From: Road Walker	Respond to of 1576663

I figured the $82K number was bogus. You can't trust anything in a link from Tim. Thanks.

To: combjelly who wrote (353437)	10/4/2007 6:24:41 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1576663

SCHIP has a mandated coverage for 2x the poverty level, or $41k for a family of 4. That the current limit. The proposal is to increase it to more like $60k, with waivers for certain states for $10 or $20k more. Because an income of $82k in New York City or Silicon Valley would not be a lot of money for a family of 4. No it wouldn't be a lot but it wouldn't be poverty. They might be struggling but lots of people have financial struggles but wouldn't legitimately be categorized as poor. Also the higher limits wouldn't just apply in those high price areas, but in the whole states that those areas are in. $82k is all that bad in rural western NY. Even ignoring rural areas, Buffalo has a cost of living index of last than half of New York City's ( infoplease.com ), and there are a fare number of people in CA who don't live in or near LA, San Fran, or San Diego. As for the really high areas if the cost is so high to live there I still don't see how that justifies subsidizing it. If people can't afford to live in a particular area they should start trying to figure out how to set themselves up somewhere else.