I don't know the answer to that question, but my situation was similar. My companies ins for just me was fairly cheap, around $100 a month, but when i added my wife and kids it went to $785 per month. Hell of a deal, especially when you consider the $2500 deductible, and $50 co-pay on doctor visits and prescriptions.
I wish we had a "family plan" here. My rates go up per dependant. And each dependants rates vary depending on age, health history, etc. etc.
Well, I was being sarcastic. That is ridiculous pricing. Imagine the folks that make $2000-$3000 a month trying to afford that. We have many employees at that company that make imcomes in that range or less that had to pay the same prices if they wanted ins. No way they could afford it.
The gap between the rich and the middle class will always grow. Someone with 10 million dollars only needs to make a 1% return ($100,000) to surpass most middle class Americans. Unless you advocate an upper tax rate on all income of 100% please tell me under what economic conditions will the gap between the rich and middle class not grow. The deficit seems to be a major concern of yours yet Obama has no plans of reducing the deficit. Instead he's proposing government spending increases of over 200 billion annually and along with that tax cuts for 95% of Americans. A Mccain presidency would be more inline with the economic policies you advocate and you don't even realize it. If Mccain wins not only will the Bush tax cuts not be renewed but his plans for additional tax cuts will not pass. The Democratically controlled Congress will not allow the Bush tax cuts to be renewed and will not allow Mccain to pass his tax cuts. The Democrats have enough seats right now to stop Mccain's proposed policies and even if they don't I think you will agree that the Dems will make substantially gains this fall. No one is talking about this. Why? An Obama win will mean increased government spending of over 200 billion annually that is not paid for, a tax cut for 95% of tax payers that is not paid for, and ballooning deficits which you are advocating against. Obama's plan is irresponsible. You can argue that Mccain's plan is also irresponsible but how is Mccain going to get his plan through Congress?
Good point. Bottom line, both candidates are lying, like Bush and every other president has lied about "fixing social security problem". Sounds good, never happens. Both will be confronted by economic reality and do what they have to do. I have more confidence in the dems on fiscal responsibility. Clinton reduced the rate of spending growth and raised taxes on the rich, and balanced the budget. Bush cut taxes, primarily benefiting the rich (average tax savings for the top 1% was $38,000 per year), and vastly increased spending (drug bill at 100M per year, wars at a trillion over 5 years), giving the worst budget deficit record in history by far, nearly doubled the 230 year cumulative debt of the nation in 8 years. McCain had to sell his soul to the RNC, so he will dance to their tune. Just more of the same, tax cuts for the rich, spending going to defense hogs in the trough and stealing our money. $600 billion a year on defense currently, #2 nation, Russia, spends $75 billion. We don't need that much defense, its corporate welfare for the military industrial complex, not to mention big pharma. People be damned if they can't afford drugs, dr., and hospitals.
Sounds good to me. What I disagree with is government meddling in setting prices and mandating coverage. If there is money to be made writing a policy, someone will develop a business model to do it. My problem with some pre-existing conditions (like those induced by morbid obesity or a lifetime of smoking or alchoholism) is that if you force insurance companies to write policies on these people, then EVERYONE ELSE pays for their medical care (the difference between the cost of the healthcare and the affordable premiums) through increased premiums for everyone - which is socialized medicine. I have lived with socialized medicine. It sucks.
i say they are when the govt allows their parents to come here and be exploited by businesses completely with you there. please use your pull in the GOP to get the message across. id say its #2 on my list of why im voting obama. i completely disagree with the "beacon on the hill" or whatever that false ideology line that reagan said. to me thats not an excuse for abandoning them. i adamantly disagree with your characterization of the poor. you do not have to have made poor choices or be lazy to be poor. id like to think we are a smart enough society to be able to help the worthy poor without perpetuating the other poor.
my bad. forgot about that one. she was so sick she didnt even go to high school. bright kid, just took the ged at 15. and is half way to a degree, but the insurance is cutting her off at 18 (obviously i dont know that for sure, but its what the family said and they are planning for it). the dad is looking for a job in new zealand and if he doesnt get what he wants theyll stay and pay tons til she can get a job like you said. great health care system we have huh? good thing she isnt an idiot. come to think of it, i guess down's kids arent covered.
Down's kids are usually permanent dependants...which means they are covered no matter their age. As far as the girl is concerned...no way they are cutting her off at 18 if she is in school..I call BS.
:rofl: I've never seen a statement that somehow puts the blame on everyone but the ones responsible like this. Did you think of this? If so, you need to go to work with the dems...they could use you for their talking points. The government is to blame...business is to blame...but don't dare blame the POS illegals. Very creative!
