"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 12:51:57 -0800, "Capt. JG"
said:

I would also like to know how you reduce incentives of those who pay
"virtually" nothing if those people have little or no money to pay more?
The
only way I can think of is to make it extraordinarily difficult for them
to
get healthcare, and that's certainly what the Bu****s and the other
right-wing nuts have attempted. How much more do you suggest a person of
limited means should pay and to whom should he or she pay it?

I think perhaps you're being willfully blind, Jon. The people I'm talking
about who pay "virtually" nothing are not the po' folks. They're people
like
me who are covered what's euphemistically called "insurance" and is
actually
a prepayment plan. Having paid their contribution every month, they can
walk
into the doctor's office and just write a check for $20 when they walk
out.
That's how my plan works, at least. It costs me a significant fixed amount
every month, but having paid, there's no incentive whatever for me not to
use the services it covers on every possible occasion.

You said "It costs me a significant fixed amount every month." So, how is
that a burdon to the rest of us? If don't pay so much upfront, your
incentive to go to the doctor with a real need would be less.


Where are you getting this about folks who make 100s of 1000s paying $20
to
see a doctor? The only way this happens is if you're covered by your
companies insurance policy, a policy that I guarantee is going to limit
what
is or isn't a legitimate visit. Do you really believe that someone with a
company policy is going to go to the doctor because they have the
sniffles?

Absolutely. And I'd be damned surprised if I got any objection from the
insurance company.

Not sure what planet you live on, but here when you go to the doctor, you
typically have to take time off to do it. The company is definitely
concerned about that, and if you keep doing it, you won't be working there
very long.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com