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.
I have tried and tried to understand how those horrible companies manage to COMPETE on a level footing when the government program can always fall back on tax money to make up losses. I just can't see how there will be any competition when the government is aiming to give less expensive policies to people than the privates can afford.
I'm sure the private companies can afford it. Have you seen their profits and the average CEO salary?
Of course someone's loved one was probably denied care but hey....as long as they made a profit, they don't give a damn.
The concept of a public option is rather simple. The Federal government establishes what in effect is a public health insurance company. The insurance provided by the government would be open to any citizens with premiums predicted, by the Congressional Budge Office, to be somewhere near 10% less than a similar plan through a private insurer. The stated goal of the public option is to provide less expensive insurance to the public while at the same time interjecting greater competition amongst insurers.
OK. The average family premium is just over $10,000 per year in the US. Lets assume the "public option" is 10% cheaper, or $9K per year. Monthly premiums are $750 a month. How many families are going to sign up?
Assume you have access to coverage now through work. Assume the company pays 60% (which is the national average). I have a choice of paying 40% of $10,000, or 100% of $9,000. If I currently have access and do not participate because it is too expensive, the mandatory public option is going to be a shock.
All of these are assumptions because the dimwits in Washington have released no details on what will be the second largest item in the budget. And you wonder why people like me are against it? JFC!
OK. The average family premium is just over $10,000 per year in the US. Lets assume the "public option" is 10% cheaper, or $9K per year. Monthly premiums are $750 a month. How many families are going to sign up?
Assume you have access to coverage now through work. Assume the company pays 60% (which is the national average). I have a choice of paying 40% of $10,000, or 100% of $9,000. If I currently have access and do not participate because it is too expensive, the mandatory public option is going to be a shock.
All of these are assumptions because the dimwits in Washington have released no details on what will be the second largest item in the budget. And you wonder why people like me are against it? JFC!
Mandatory public option?
What part of, "If you like the coverage you have now, you don't have to change" is so hard to comprehend?
My educated guess is that "public option" will be a "Ford"-type policy, not a "Cadillac". So there will be an incentive to keep what you get from your employer. Plus, I thought I had heard rumblings that only if you have no other option would you be eligible for the public option?
What part of, "If you like the coverage you have now, you don't have to change" is so hard to comprehend?
What part of English don't you comprehend? Go back and read my post slower. The people who are now uninsured will be required to take the public option. Who is going to pay for it? If they can't afford it now, how can they afford it if its only 10% cheaper? Again - who do you think is going to pay for it?
What part of English don't you comprehend? The people who are now uninsured will be required to take the public option. Who is going to pay for it? If they can't afford it now, how can they afford it if its only 10% cheaper? Again - who do you think is going to pay for it?
Since there really is no "bill" at present that is about to be signed by the president, we can't know any of this stuff for sure. However, what I read before the August recess was that there would be subsidies based on income/ability to pay.
What part of English don't you comprehend? Go back and read my post slower. The people who are now uninsured will be required to take the public option. Who is going to pay for it? If they can't afford it now, how can they afford it if its only 10% cheaper? Again - who do you think is going to pay for it?
There is no mandate.
Unless the unemployed person has a bunch in savings, they won't be on the public option, which is yet another reason this public option sucks. It still ties health insurance to employment for the most part.
Then you have not read the Bill. If you are currently uninsured, you will be required to get insurance. Again, who do you think is going to pay for it?
Then you have not read the Bill. If you are currently uninsured, you will be required to get insurance. Again, who do you think is going to pay for it?
Which bill? There is more than one health care bill going around. Whenever someone says THE BILL without referencing a specific one they look like a fool because there is more than one bill floating around.
Please show me a link to the bill you are quoting and where one will be required to buy insurance.
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.