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: Katelew who wrote (41486)	3/17/2017 8:43:52 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42652

Without a strong inducement for continuous coverage, then it becomes harder for premiums to fall I think. The original version called for a thirty percent penalty for one year. Reaction to it was that it would be a disincentive for people to retain continuous coverage. The penalty in Medicare Part B is ten percent per year you were out applied forever. That was enough to disabuse me from declining it. I also think this is an area that is so complex and so far out of Trump's wheelhouse, that he may get "played" by Ryan et al. Trump clearly has no clue. He still hasn't gotten over the news that it's complicated. Ryan is likely playing him, but, in fairness, Ryan doesn't have a lot of feasible options so he doesn't have enough wiggle room to accord Trump much say. There's no way to do a plan that meets Trump's promises, not without giving up the wall and the aircraft carriers and cutting SS and Medicare.