Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The rest of your post was spot-on, but in my case, I wasn't looking at tax credits as an incentive to buy private insurance, but more as a slight tax discount for those that opt-out of UHC, and/or for those that buy their own insurance.
33458 was talking about percentages, that percentage, in the form of a tax credit, could be as low as 5%, say 5% for not being in UHC, and another 5% for having your own insurance. That would still be 90% of their UHC taxes going to fund it, and one less person (or family) on the rolls.
In this very hypothetical scenario, I don't feel sorry for those that don't want UHC being taxed for it, and/or complaining that they can't afford private insurance due to the UHC taxes. If one can't truly afford to purchase their own insurance, then they probably shouldn't, that's what the UHC would be for. Private insurance costs would likely come down in response to the increased competition from the public option.
An Orange County representative on NPR stated this past week that tax credits should be used as an incentive. The word incentive was verbatim. I assumed that you proposed the same idea and would use it in the same manner. This was opposed to any public option.
An Orange County representative on NPR stated this past week that tax credits should be used as an incentive. The word incentive was verbatim. I assumed that you proposed the same idea and would use it in the same manner. This was opposed to any public option.
I should have taken more time to read the posts.
Okay, apology accepted.
No, I'm all for the public option, and don't believe that opting-out should be incentivized -- it seems there's a whole class of people out there that believes they should be rewarded financially (i.e. lower taxes) for simply being responsible, my proposal of 10% would hardly be an incentive to opt-out, but more of an appeasement (letting them have their cake).
The rest of my thoughts on the matter can be read on page 6, if you are interested.
No, I'm all for the public option, and don't believe that opting-out should be incentivized -- it seems there's a whole class of people out there that believes they should be rewarded financially (i.e. lower taxes) for simply being responsible, my proposal of 10% would hardly be an incentive to opt-out, but more of an appeasement (letting them have their cake).
The rest of my thoughts on the matter can be read on page 6, if you are interested.
I kind of agree with you on this one.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
