Of course he was being over charged for COBRA. And?
wtf?
"the Richardsons only pay $136 a month for health insurance that covers them both." is cheap cheap, they are being subsidized.
You've been properly conditioned.
So it's cheaper and better to subsidize insurance through govt than to
invest resources into cost-effective medical education and services directly?
(BR)yes way cheaper for all emily cinciola
That's fine if this is the better solution.
I just want to know if it's only politics preventing agreement on this as the solution,
or if it is more cost-effective to invest directly in education, facilities and services
and remove insurance from the equation except as an optional choice.
(BR)republican will never allow that to happen
Hasn't it been shown financially that investing the same money spent on insurance
would produce greater dividends if invested in "other forms of savings" (eg, compare
(BR) NO no amount of investing will cover any hospital cost
real estate, where investments pay off greater returns faster than 401K so people retire early.
(BR) YOU"RE TALKING apples and oranges ... one health care cost can wipe out your entire retirement account, Yesterday a sombody posted a guy who didn't have health care prior to January 1 of this year had a heart attack December 31 ... it will cost him 407,000 dollars for that one operation and if you know of anybody who has had this kind of operation theres more to come
wouldn't that model work better for paying for health care than govt mandates on insurance?).
(BR)the government mandates you should buy insurance ... the government doesn't sell insurance ... the private sector does... and no it wouldn't work better... its has shown many times that your way doesn't work
So if the govt was going to choose a "middle man" system to invest in
to cover medical costs and health care,
wouldn't OTHER venues of investment actually pay off better than insurance?
Has this been discussed at all?