finally someone at fox news that can think logically

Quote from Dr. Zhivodka:

That's all fair until and when your wife or you're mother needs a Kidney transplant through no fault of her own...and yet she's denied. Then what is the fair market value of her life?

In the chart below, please tell us which payer has the highest percentage of denials?

2hgcz0x.jpg
 
Quote from BernardRichards:

I agree with O'Reilly. As an independent trader I am paying more than twice as much for my health insurance than if I was able to obtain group insurance by working for a corporation. I want a public option so the insurance companies in league with my state politicians won't be able to rip me off. Why should I as an independent trader have to pay more than twice as much for my health insurance than if I was working in a corporate environment?

This is a result of government skewing the market with wrong incentives.
Business can deduct the cost of premiums so most of the programs are centered around corporations.

Only recently has the individual policy market started to become more competitive. If the government were to allow private citizens to write off the premiums the cost of private insurance would go down.
 
The government defends the country. That's it. After that, it is the most conflicted corrupt entity, excepting organized crime, in America.

It is admirable to deliver health care at an affordable costs. To have the government do it is to get a bucket brigade to put out a skyscaper fire with a bucket filled with holes.
 
Quote from BernardRichards:

I agree with O'Reilly. As an independent trader I am paying more than twice as much for my health insurance than if I was able to obtain group insurance by working for a corporation. I want a public option so the insurance companies in league with my state politicians won't be able to rip me off. Why should I as an independent trader have to pay more than twice as much for my health insurance than if I was working in a corporate environment?

You are right, but I also think it is the result of a combination of factors, eg the tax system favors employer-provided coverage, the state-by-state approach and the mandates for coverage of items many people don't want.

There is no reason to think that a public option would be more efficient. The only way it would be cheaper is if it is subsidized by taxpayers, which of course it will be. Why is it the government's responsibility to give a group favored by O'Reilly subsidized health care? Why not make it so that there will be private insurers able and willing to offer affordable coverage? Maybe that coverage is limited to major medical with a sizeable co-pay, but it is better than nothing.
 
Quote from Dr. Zhivodka:

That's all fair until and when your wife or you're mother needs a Kidney transplant through no fault of her own...and yet she's denied. Then what is the fair market value of her life?

Courts of course have a formula for it...




Your a tool. Good luck.


And the ignore list grows.
 
Hilarious, coming from someone who has no idea what the difference is between your and you're.
Where does this parade of ignorant asses come from anyway? You know their not actually traders, 'cuz if they were, they'd know better than to argue against their own interests in the health care debate.
They have to be trailer park wannabees, figuring that this place provides them with a friendly place to park their evident lack of knowledge of anything beyond the slough some developer sold them as a lake.
 
Back
Top