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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (2442)	10/28/2007 5:43:22 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Having health insurance normally come from an employer might be less than ideal, but it isn't unfair or somehow moved out of the realm of the free market. Oh certainly its not a perfectly free market thing, it gets better tax treatment than most other forms of compensation. I don't think it should but its hardly the only way the tax code intervenes in the economy, and to the extent such intervention is a problem the answer is to get rid of the special tax benefit.

To: Road Walker who wrote (2442)	10/28/2007 5:56:58 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42652

So to avoid gambling on a catastrophic situation the only one that isn't discretionary is health. I don't buy that. Of course it's discretionary. You only need it if you get sick, just like you only need home insurance if your house burns down and car insurance if you have an accident. (Some states may require car insurance but that's a separate issue.) You're allowed to gamble on your health care just as you can gamble on your house. Many people choose not to carry health insurance. (I have intentionally been without health insurance. It can be a rational choice.) They are part of that forty-some thousand number folks keep throwing around. My first solution to the problem would be to outlaw employer paid insurance and let everyone shpt or there own. Nonetheless, I agree with that. I wouldn't outlaw it but I would take away the tax favored treatment so as to disabuse employers of the practice.