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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito who wrote (130182)	2/5/2010 1:17:00 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541958

But I believe it ends up being more expensive to choose not to cover things like checkups. No it would probably cost more. Preventive care doesn't save money, it adds to costs. Which doesn't mean its a bad thing, it can improve results, but that's a different point. And increasing third party payment for it, increases costs even more. Also where not dealing with the poor who can't afford checkups. They are currently covered in other ways which, unless there was additional changes, they would retain instead of, or in addition to, this catastrophic plan idea. PS: I apologize for taking the "handout" comment personally. I apologize for being insensitive about how it might be taken under the circumstances.