Quote:
Originally Posted by joeydb
It is making insurance less obtainable for everyone who pays. It only make it more obtainable for those who do not pay. That is a transfer of wealth. The recipient recieves and the provider pays for himself and the recipient. That is basically a transaction.
If someone's insurance goes from $400 a month to $950 a month, and they did not get $550 more in insurance or useful services, then they got ripped off. In this case the money went to pay the bill for the guy getting the freebies.
There is no free lunch and never will be, no matter how much the liberals cry.
|
it's not a transfer of wealth, unless i missed the tax increase to pay for this new stuff?
as for those whose premiums went up due to having their plans cancelled, they are getting more coverages. their lifetime maximums are no more.
like i said, i don't like the law. it's way too convoluted. but something had to be done, plenty still has to be done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeydb
The fact that you think that there is merely a semantic difference between willful charitable acts and government confiscation of assets for redistribution is quite illuminating.
|
thanks for the laugh.