On 3/29/10 10:08 AM, Don White wrote:
wrote in message
...

wrote in message
m...

I think " necessary health care" and "subsidized health care insurance"
are
two different things.

Eisboch



No "other words" are needed. I believe health insurance or a national
health plan should be mandatory, and if you legitimately cannot afford
the insurance, it should be subsidized for you and your family to the
degree necessary.


The hang-up I still have is the difference between a mandatory health
insurance program and the right to free or subsidized (tax supported)
health care for life threatening or disabling conditions. Mandatory
health insurance puts another massive layer of bureaucracy, private or
government, into the mix. When it comes to getting care, that has never
been a good thing.

A mandatory health insurance law is in effect here in MA. For those who
can't afford the subsidized insurance (state programs) it is cheaper to
pay the fine (assuming the state even enforces the collection of them,
which I doubt.)

Tough call. I guess my attitude is that those of us that are fortunate
enough to be able to afford decent health insurance also have a moral
obligation to assist those who need medical care (though a tax or
increased insurance premium) for those who cannot afford insurance. But
to subsidize health *insurance* programs is another matter.

Eisboch

I agree that you should kick those parasitic health insurance companies to
the curb and have a government supplied universal health care system.
The question is...what's the fairest& most efficient way to pay for it... a
national sales tax..... an increase in income tax.... or premiums colected
from anyone who reports an income?




I stated previously I see no purpose served by health insurance
companies, but we're stuck with them for a while longer.

--
Conservatives - just pretend Obama's health care legislation is another
unnecessary war and you'll feel better about it.