Re: Possible Solution to Health Insurance

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 03:32:23 +0100, "Bill Bonde { ''Mr Gore, tear down
this wall'')"  <tributyltinpaint@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>
>
>Hawki63@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>> 
>> "good@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <gooddad@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>
news:1b6ed0ff-36b7-4d4b-9ecd-8053b091024e@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > The state should raise taxes to pay for health insurance, and give
>> > money back to the people that can only be used to pay for health
>> > insurance premiums.  And then prohibit health plans from
>> > discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions.  This way
>> > everyone will be insured on at least some minimum plan.  For
instance,
>> > you would receive $60 a month or some amount in some way, that you
>> > could use only towards the payment of a health insurance premium.  If
>> > you wanted a higher priced plan you would pay more out of your own
>> > pocket.
>> >
>> > Healthcare costs money and there is no way for it to be free.  The
>> > government does not make money out of thin air.  Either the consumers
>> > pay or the taxpayers pay, or we suffer with inferior service, which
is
>> > not what we want either.  The above plan insures everyone while
>> > maintaining the free market.
>> >
>> > See http://www.ehealthinsurance.com/
for all the different plans.
>> >
>> > Health is more im****tant than wealth.  The very least the rich can do
>> > is pay for the poor's healthcare.
>> 
>> $60 a month?? would buy you NO health coverage at all
>> 
>> regardless of pre existing conditions etc
>> 
>> get real
>>
>He is being real. $60 a month would buy some insurance. There are
>(or at least could be) medial savings account plans in that basic
>area.

$60 a month for me individually would be a nearly 60% of my premium. I
pay around $27 a week for individual coverage.
That much of a subsidy would allow most folks that currently can't
afford it to be able to.
If it were $60 per individual and not per family it would allow a
family of three to get basic health coverage for around the same cost
to them as a single individual, possibly a family of four depending
upon the provider.

Libs would never go for that though since it wouldn't cover 100% of
the premium.  You know it's that all or nothing thing they got going.



'A government big enough to give you everything you want, is
big enough to take away everything you have.'

"You cannot enrich the poor by impoveri****ng the rich."