| Science Forum Index » Economy Forum » The public option and premium prices.... |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Gary Forbis... |
 Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 10:10 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
If I understand Lieberman's argument it goes like this:
If government offers substantially the same coverage
for less money then the only way insurance companies
can maintain their profits (not their profit margin) is to
raise the premiums on those who don't take the public
option. This is a hidden tax on people who maintain
private health insurance.
It seems to me that this leads to the Republican
asserted "Government takeover of health care"
becasue the increased premiums without increased
benefits will just push more to the public option.
The part I don't understand is why any market
theorist would assert competition against a cartel
is a bad thing especially if the competition is
administered by the government. The lower premiums
for substantially the same services cannot be "a
hidden tax" on those paying the lower premiums
nor on the rest of the tax payers who would see
no increase in taxes for this reason. It would
even lower the cost of the subsidy to the uninsured
for insurance so would provide a lower burden on
income tax payers. Who exactly is Lieberman
concerned about and why? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Rod Speed... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:29 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Gary Forbis wrote:
[quote]If I understand Lieberman's argument it goes like this:
If government offers substantially the same coverage
for less money then the only way insurance companies
can maintain their profits (not their profit margin) is to
raise the premiums on those who don't take the public
option. This is a hidden tax on people who maintain
private health insurance.
It seems to me that this leads to the Republican
asserted "Government takeover of health care"
becasue the increased premiums without increased
benefits will just push more to the public option.
The part I don't understand is why any market
theorist would assert competition against a cartel
is a bad thing especially if the competition is
administered by the government.
[/quote]
It isnt a cartel.
[quote]The lower premiums for substantially the same services
cannot be "a hidden tax" on those paying the lower
premiums nor on the rest of the tax payers who
would see no increase in taxes for this reason. It would
even lower the cost of the subsidy to the uninsured
for insurance so would provide a lower burden on
income tax payers. Who exactly is Lieberman
concerned about and why?
[/quote]
He just hates the idea of the govt being involved. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 6:55 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 01:10:48 -0700 (PDT), Gary Forbis
<forbisgaryg at (no spam) msn.com> wrote:
[quote]If I understand Lieberman's argument it goes like this:
If government offers substantially the same coverage
for less money then the only way insurance companies
can maintain their profits (not their profit margin) is to
raise the premiums on those who don't take the public
option. This is a hidden tax on people who maintain
private health insurance.
It seems to me that this leads to the Republican
asserted "Government takeover of health care"
becasue the increased premiums without increased
benefits will just push more to the public option.
The part I don't understand is why any market
theorist would assert competition against a cartel
is a bad thing especially if the competition is
administered by the government. The lower premiums
for substantially the same services cannot be "a
hidden tax" on those paying the lower premiums
nor on the rest of the tax payers who would see
no increase in taxes for this reason. It would
even lower the cost of the subsidy to the uninsured
for insurance so would provide a lower burden on
income tax payers. Who exactly is Lieberman
concerned about and why?
[/quote]
He's from Connecticut, and many large health insurance companies are
from his state. He has personally taken over 2 million in donations
from health industry lobbies. A distinct majority of voters in his
state support a public option but he will kill it because the
insurance industry has him in his pocket. He is a lying, cocksucking
Jew who care's nothing about Americans. He is corrupt as they come.
If he does this the voters of Connecticut should recall that
cocksucker.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/lobbyblog |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
