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.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: James Hutton who wrote (219296)9/8/2009 2:50:28 PM
From: Smiling BobRespond to of 306849
 
I frankly haven't followed the health care debate that closely because it is in flux
--
Ditto. Any reform will be watered down and in bits and pieces. The final version will look nothing like what's being presented. So why pay attention to what is nothing but more political posturing? You're only falling prey.
This is Congress's version of American Idol.



To: James Hutton who wrote (219296)9/8/2009 3:16:47 PM
From: GraceZRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 306849
 
None of the existing proposed legislation requires a compulsory public plan, does it?


History is a good teacher in terms of government "options". When it was created Social Security was optional as was Medicare. Medicare is actually still "optional" in that you can opt out of it by not signing up when you are 65 avoiding the "premiums", but it isn't optional in terms of not paying into it while you are working in the form of a payroll tax. Only very select government workers have the option of opting out of Social Security.

You might want to shop for health insurance for someone who is over 65 that isn't basically Medi-gap insurance and see how much still remains of the private sector in that area. It's a little like buying disability insurance that doesn't include Social Security Disability into the payout scenarios! It can be done but at a much higher cost than you want to pay.