Michael Madigan wrote: > Of course there should be insurance, but the bad > driver should pay more than the good driver. The > healthy person should pay less than the sickly person. > The responsible person should pay less than the > irresponsible person. > > > > --- Stephen Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:43 AM, Michael Madigan >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> >>> Shouldn't we have choices? Why should a healthy >>> person who drives pay for a sickly person? If you >>> want to tax drivers for roads and bridges that's >>> >> fine. >> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> Why should you have auto insurance then? Why bother >> with the pesky home >> owners insurance as well? >> >> As an indi consultant do you even have health >> insurance or does it come via >> your gf and her work? >> >> Why am I wasting my time asking you these questions >> anyway? >> >> >> >> -- >> Stephen Russell >> Sr. Production Systems Programmer >> Mimeo.com >> Memphis TN >> >> 901.246-0159 >> >> >> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- >> multipart/alternative >> text/plain (text body -- kept) >> text/html >> --- >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Post Messages to: [email protected] >> Subscription Maintenance: >> http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox >> OT-free version of this list: >> http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech >> Searchable Archive: >> http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox >> This message: >> >> > http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, >> are the opinions of the author, and do not >> constitute legal or medical advice. This statement >> is added to the messages for those lawyers who are >> too stupid to see the obvious. >> >> > >
Health insurance seems to be a little different than regular insurance regarding risk. For example, what are the odds that anyone will remain healthy forever and never die. We will all die, if for no other reason than old age. Should the young pay less for health insurance than the old; because, as we age the probably of health issue and death increases, or should health insurance be more like a pre-payment plan for health care for the nation as a whole? Perhaps some day DNA can be analyzed to assess risk with contributions to the plan corresponding with risk, but that would really defeat the purpose of universal health care. Universal health care is a product designed to provide health care to all people regardless of social status, race, creed, nationality, sex, age, etc. Universal health insurance is a product designed for a civilize and caring nation. This mean that paying the majority of the cost for universal health care by means of a progress tax system may be best, as those who are most blessed are called upon to make the greatest contribution into the system. What better way to pay for the necessity of universal health care, than through taxing discretionary income that would yield greatly diminishing returns if otherwise left in investment portfolios or lavished away by the wealthy. Regards, LelandJ > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
