Originally posted by Cuivienen
Let me correct your analogy for you:
You foo, me, Cuiv, cornblade, lurchy, cowpoker, and seths all decide to buy a house together. We decide to split the cost evenly, although some of us will use the house more than others. At the last minute 2 of us decide we don't want to pay for it but are still going to live there. The lease agreement we signed with each other states that those 2 still get to live in the house regardless of whether they pay or not leaving whichever of the remaining 5 who show up at the house to now split a much larger share. Not fair right? That's what happens now. Hospitals bill insurance companies and paying uninsured customers to recoup monies spent providing care to those that do not pay, whether they are uninsured or not. Insurance companies then pass some of that cost on to its customers via premiums and deductibles.
Also, glbisthewaytobe, your preferred solution isn't to make all 7 people pay 1/7th of the rent. Your solution is to go from 2 people living rent free to 3 people living rent free, 2 people living with almost no rent, 1 person living with a fair rent, and 1 person making up the rent for the first 5 people. If your status quo scenario is unfair, how is your future scenario not way more unfair?
All this is so much lol and devoid of fact it's crazy. You don't know what my preferred solution is so stop making shitty assumptions.
My preferred solution is to remove the over 65 clause from medicare and allow people to choose between medicare and whatever the fuck else they want. Making private companies compete with one of the most efficient and cheapest health care coverage providers will only make things cheaper for everyone. Nice troll job though.
Let me correct your analogy for you:
You foo, me, Cuiv, cornblade, lurchy, cowpoker, and seths all decide to buy a house together. We decide to split the cost evenly, although some of us will use the house more than others. At the last minute 2 of us decide we don't want to pay for it but are still going to live there. The lease agreement we signed with each other states that those 2 still get to live in the house regardless of whether they pay or not leaving whichever of the remaining 5 who show up at the house to now split a much larger share. Not fair right? That's what happens now. Hospitals bill insurance companies and paying uninsured customers to recoup monies spent providing care to those that do not pay, whether they are uninsured or not. Insurance companies then pass some of that cost on to its customers via premiums and deductibles.
Also, glbisthewaytobe, your preferred solution isn't to make all 7 people pay 1/7th of the rent. Your solution is to go from 2 people living rent free to 3 people living rent free, 2 people living with almost no rent, 1 person living with a fair rent, and 1 person making up the rent for the first 5 people. If your status quo scenario is unfair, how is your future scenario not way more unfair?
All this is so much lol and devoid of fact it's crazy. You don't know what my preferred solution is so stop making shitty assumptions.
My preferred solution is to remove the over 65 clause from medicare and allow people to choose between medicare and whatever the fuck else they want. Making private companies compete with one of the most efficient and cheapest health care coverage providers will only make things cheaper for everyone. Nice troll job though.
