LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers > General Discussion > Politics

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 667
0 members and 667 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 4,499, 10-26-2015 at 08:55 AM.
 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 10-13-2004, 02:35 PM   #11
taxwonk
Wild Rumpus Facilitator
 
taxwonk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: In a teeny, tiny, little office
Posts: 14,167
I'm Pleased

Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Doubtless that market is distorted by the tax benefits to employers of providing health insurance. But not for those incentives, employers would be relatively different. Except that consumers have more power in the marketplace when they pool, as through an employer. If everyone was left to purchase health care individually, you'd see a lot more cream-skimming, to the detriment of many of us.



Instead of mandating that people purchase it, and struggling with the resulting enforcement/gap-filling problems, why not provide basic coverage through the government (directly or indirectly) and "make" people pay for it by taxing them?
One would also have to address the fact that, without the collective purchasing power of employers or the state, insurance companies would simply refuse to insure many of the people most in need. For example, I could not purchase private health insurance. I have a heart condition and diabetes. No company would cover me. Without employer-provided health insurance I would be destitute and, ultimately, dead, due to an inability to pay the costs of my health care out of pocket.
__________________
Send in the evil clowns.
taxwonk is offline  
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:36 PM.