AgainstTheMachine
Well-Known Member
Instead of the government tossing billions into covering the cost of ALL old people they should consider ways to shift cost to those in business to handle the job.
CONSIDER THIS:
Coverage is coverage and people argue that when people are in a group insurance they should get a cheaper cost than those who are not in a group
(even though I personally think there should only be ONE GROUP called HUMAN or CUSTOMER)
So; why don't they distribute the cost of senior health care over the offspring's group insurance and just get most of senior healthcare out of government hands except for the senior who has no living children?
CONSIDER THIS:
Since kids can stay on that long - why can't they reciprocate and be allowed to put elderly parents on theirs when they are getting it from their employer?Several of the provisions of the health care bill's provisions went into effect on September 23rd, one of the most popular of them being the fact that kids can now stay on their parent's health care policies until age 26 (SOURCE)
Coverage is coverage and people argue that when people are in a group insurance they should get a cheaper cost than those who are not in a group
(even though I personally think there should only be ONE GROUP called HUMAN or CUSTOMER)
So; why don't they distribute the cost of senior health care over the offspring's group insurance and just get most of senior healthcare out of government hands except for the senior who has no living children?