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: cnyndwllr who wrote (134420)	3/23/2010 4:38:12 PM
From: KyrosL	Respond to of 542914

That's my hope too.

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (134420)	3/23/2010 5:54:55 PM
From: Katelew	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542914

Ahhhhh, Ed. You're like a cool washcloth on the back of the neck. I've been reading about the plan for two day. Everytime I'm about to foam at the mouth, I remind myself of just that scenario. If this was the genuine endgame, though, they sure have put the proposed plan on a slow timetable. But I still agree with you about the possibility. In fact, as I've read I've looked at the structure of the proposal for things that would facilitate such a shift. One thing jumped out which is that the exchanges will have to offer one choice that is a somewhat pure catastophic policy. Young people up to the age of 30 can buy it. Past the age of 30, some will still be able to purchase this kind of coverage if some other criteria are met. Also, one choice on the exchange will have to be from a non-profit insurer, I guess a Blue Cross entry. It's not a stretch to see the majority of people moving to one or the other of these two options. With the government determining what benefits are in each of those policy choices, we could end up with a kind of bifurcated single payer system. Hmmm....is that phrase some kind of malaprop?