On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 08:47:23 -0500, Shay wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 16:03:19 -0500, Shay wrote:
>> 
>>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 20:16:43 -0700, Chambers wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Now that it's being socialized in the US, does that mean that I'll
>>>>> get a raise since my company won't have to pay my premiums anymore?
>>>>> :)
>>>> No, because the private insurance option still exists - so you'd have
>>>> to opt out of it in order to not have to pay the premiums.
>>> Or your company could "opt out" of paying private healthcare premiums
>>> as part of your compensation. But why would they do that?
>> 
>> Sure, they could do that, but if enough employees wanted it and walked
>> as a result, that might not be a good thing for the employer.
>> 
>> Employees still have power.
>> 
>> Jim
> 
> With 9-15% unemployment?!!

Sure, I know people who have quit their job and taken other jobs in the 
last couple of weeks.

> Our presidents *stated* goal is a single-payer government system.

Our president's stated goal is health care reform, because the system is 
hopelessly broken.  We're the only industrialized nation that doesn't 
provide basic health care to all of its citizens.  Our costs are nearly 
double anyone else, but our quality of care has us rated at #37 according 
to the World Health Organization.

> What are private insurance rates going to do when the self-insured (and
> by "self-insured" I mean not only the self-employed but also the
> unemployed dependents for whom the employed pay additional,
> out-of-pocket premiums) leave the poisoned private healthcare system?

Well, the capitalists are going to say "compete", because competition is 
supposedly the answer to everything.  So an option that actually is 
affordable is going to cause the insurance companies to have to compete 
or die.  The free market at work.

> Our government can poison any industry by providing a "free"
> alternative. This is why we have the tenth amendment.

I don't see how this relates.  There's nothing in the 10th amendment that 
says anything about the government not being able to provide services to 
the people.  By that same logic, the TSA shouldn't be controlled by the 
federal government, nor should the FCC, nor should we have a federal 
highway system.

Jim

Post a reply to this message