View Single Post
Old 12-10-2009, 11:32 AM   #161
dude1394
Guru
 
dude1394's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 40,410
dude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

So our father in law has medicare. He also has an AARP and a Medicare supplemental policy. His total monthly policy is now approximately 350/month. So for 350/month he gets "free" healthcare from medicare.


what is shocking to me is the below statement that government-sponsored health insurance is ALREADY 60%, what exactly is the problem here?.



Quote:

http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/89785/

TUNKU VARADRAJAN ON HEALTH CARE:
Medicare is not a bad thing, per se, but it is inefficient, costly, and fraud-ridden. If fully costed, no one would prefer a Medicare policy to a private plan. If subsidized, everyone would, and employers will tilt to make sure their employees subscribe to it. If so, this incremental Medicare approach would raise government-sponsored health insurance from about 60 percent (Medicare, Medicaid, veterans, and government employees) to 70 percent or more. So Republicans, libertarians, and others, beware: Much more than the camel’s nose in now under the tent.
This bill stinks. Kill it dead, and bury it at the crossroads with a stake through its heart.


dude1394 is offline   Reply With Quote