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: Lane3 who wrote (4899)	2/25/2008 1:36:22 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 42652

Individuals who don't want insurance would be better off. And individuals who do want the insurance would get it. And yes I recognize the free rider problem, but apparently the cost incurred by them is much less than commonly thought (at least if the figure I posted to you earlier is accurate) Edit - Not posted to you, you replied to it, but the initial post was not to you Message 24316415 Also I realize that free riders are not the old issue, but to the extent the young and very healthy are forced to participate you are in effect making them subsidize everyone else. Covering their part of the "free rider" problem would be reasonable (or at least could be, depending on how its done), but they would only be a fraction of that problem and that problem is only 2.8% of health care costs.