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.
Is the amount of money that will be used to procure birth control for every woman going to be off set by a lowering in the birth rate?
Me thinks it won't, which means its wasteful.
I understand the thinking, give all women birth control to lower the need to pay for assistance to help parents with their childrens needs, but this is ridiculous.
I can understand free pills for poor women but for rich women? No one has to pay for their kids needs since they will never go on welfare.
The government should be handing those out like candy to those looking for a better life as they cross illegally into the US...but then that would defy their purpose for coming here in the first place..Hmmmm
In all seriousness, it costs $9 for the generic pill? I never knew that... I had used to pay out of pocket for YAZ and it was not cheap.
I can understand free pills for poor women but for rich women? No one has to pay for their kids needs since they will never go on welfare.
Janelle, you appear to be confused. You are not paying for a "rich woman" with private insurance to receive birth control. This legislation is not an entitlement program like food stamps. Your rich woman is paying her insurance provider (e.g., Aetna, Cigna, Blue Cross) to cover her healthcare costs.
At this point, the government is requiring that insurance providers cover birth control at 100%. Insurers don't like the legislation because it has the potential to diminish their profits.
Last edited by formercalifornian; 08-05-2011 at 07:48 PM..
What I find creepy is that someone who cannot afford to care for the children that they already have.....feel they are entitled to have more and expect others to pay for them.
Why shouldn't they be held to the same standards that the taxpayers who support them practice? You know.....limiting the size of their family so they can afford to support themselves.
Janelle, you appear to be confused. You are not paying for a "rich woman" with private insurance to receive birth control. This legislation is not an entitlement program like food stamps. Your rich woman is paying her insurance provider (e.g., Aetna, Cigna, Blue Cross) to cover her healthcare costs.
At this point, the government is requiring that insurance providers cover birth control at 100%. Insurers don't like the legislation because it has the potential to diminish their profits.
Lets see now, I am 78 and my wife is 62 and our children are 26 and 30. The boys pay insurance companies for their health insurance and that money can find its way into the hands of women for birth control. Surely the insurance company will raise their rates to help pay for those costs. You do understand that insurance companies have been mandated to pay for those costs, don't you.
Hell, we won't be having any more pregnancies at our house and my wife will be paying for all her health insurance for a number more years and I have to pay for my Medigap insurance to a private company. I really would rather have the government pay for all this than to have them force insurance companies to do it. Either way we who pay taxes would have to be involved in paying those costs.
Lets see now, I am 78 and my wife is 62 and our children are 26 and 30. The boys pay insurance companies for their health insurance and that money can find its way into the hands of women for birth control. Surely the insurance company will raise their rates to help pay for those costs. You do understand that insurance companies have been mandated to pay for those costs, don't you.
Hell, we won't be having any more pregnancies at our house and my wife will be paying for all her health insurance for a number more years and I have to pay for my Medigap insurance to a private company. I really would rather have the government pay for all this than to have them force insurance companies to do it. Either way we who pay taxes would have to be involved in paying those costs.
Yes, Roy, believe it or not, I understand a great deal about how the insurance world works, thankyouverymuch, so please don't patronize me.
Shall we go t!t for tat? I'm a non-smoking female who exercises regularly, eats right, and rarely goes to the doctor. The surplus from my premiums goes to treat smokers' lung cancer, couch potatoes' heart disease, and old men's erectile dysfunction.
Why shouldn't they be held to the same standards that the taxpayers who support them practice? You know.....limiting the size of their family so they can afford to support themselves.
Why are you saying oh please when s/he is right? Eugenics it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chattypatty
Now that would get my vote. Better yet, require both males and females who receive government aid to appear at a clinic every three months for a depo provera shot for the duration of their time on welfare. No shot, no check.
It's comments like this that freak me out far more than giving people free birth control.
As someone else mentioned, hello freaking eugenics. Which, by the way, we've already done in this country, in the past. Some of our practices even helped Hitler along since he got his hands on our research, studies and documentation.
I realize the poor are extremely disliked but damn. Eugenics, really?
Janelle, you appear to be confused. You are not paying for a "rich woman" with private insurance to receive birth control. This legislation is not an entitlement program like food stamps. Your rich woman is paying her insurance provider (e.g., Aetna, Cigna, Blue Cross) to cover her healthcare costs.
At this point, the government is requiring that insurance providers cover birth control at 100%. Insurers don't like the legislation because it has the potential to diminish their profits.
LOL, no it doesn't---insurance will just raise their premiums and tack it onto our payments. The people who buy insurance will be paying for all the added costs. Businesses won't hire more people.
Women on their employer's insurance will pay more for insurance as will all the other employees. You are right---nothing is free, even is the Dems make it seem that way.
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.
