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: J_F_Shepard who wrote (4867)	2/24/2008 7:11:56 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Because you made it relevant by mentioning it at least two times.... If you're going to claim something... I see. No, I didn't claim that half the filers paid no tax. This is what I said: "Remember, fewer than half of Americans pay income taxes. That means that a majority are (sic) would be getting medical coverage for free. " Perhaps you were "skimming" and missed the distinction. What you replied was that 31% of tax filers pay no tax, in other words, get all their withholding back as a refund. To that 31% you have to add all the folks who don't file at all. They, too, pay no income tax. So, you see, my 50% isn't so outlandish after all. Now perhaps you can understand the concern that the majority of voters might vote to kill the goose that lays the golden egg. No system can hold up to that many free riders. The only stable way to get universal coverage is to get insurance costs down to where all but the poor can afford it. We can handle free riders if they comprise only the poor.