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: research1234 who wrote (237299)	11/9/2013 12:48:23 PM
From: Metacomet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541911

This is not an insurance company profit issue Of course it is This entire controversy arises out of the compromise, that deferred single payer Medicare for all, to allow the vampires to keep sucking profits for nothing out of the American population ..all of these arguments are valid and could be addressed as national policy concerns if dealt with on their own merits In this layered scenario, where one political party is desperate to retain their share of the profits of a redundant industry, we see elements with some merit, being advanced as arguments to ditch the whole scheme Conflicted players jumping in as pawns in the desperate attempt to save a doomed worthless industry Everyone needs health care, it is not an option It is fundamentally immoral to require that such a necessity can only be provided if more than the actual cost is required The same argument cannot be made for auto insurance

To: research1234 who wrote (237299)	11/9/2013 1:54:19 PM
From: Crony	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 541911

Because that would be discrimination. Don't you know that alcoholism is a decease? Or that obese people are victims of food companies that make tasty junk food? How can you deny coverage to victims? Sarcasm aside, the bigger issue is that most of the medical spending goes into prolonging lives and not saving lives. Question is , why should we pay $300,000 so that someone lives 6 months longer? Would it be more fair when every individual chooses level of the coverage and if they want to live longer than God intended - they should pay for that.