Comments on: Health care vs. health insurance

By: Anton

Anton — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 14:31:00 +0000

change “your” to “you’re”

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 04:32:00 +0000

Here is a great chance to drive a large number of targeted visitors to your blogs and websites for free.

Submit your websites, blogs, videos to http://www.zillionsb.com and get 1000s of visitors everyday for free. It also helps your websites/blogs gain valuable backlinks.

Let the other bloggers cast their votes to push your posts up for a greater visibility. Enjoy free huge traffic to your sites.

Thanks

Sara

http://www.zillionsb.com

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 17:22:00 +0000

I think it is a quite valid argument that coverage for the routine elements of childbirth is not actually insurance but savings. (Complications, neonatal intensive care, etc, are in fact insurable risks.) In almost all cases, having a third party do one’s savings (whole life ins, etc) is more expensive than doing it yourself. Also, if a couple is paying childbirth expenses out of pocket (they have planned for close to 9 months, or more, so they will have saved), they will find out what the charges are and economize as they see fit, or not.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 17:17:00 +0000

That’s great! Have you by any chance calculated the same thing for Soc Sec? I think if people knew how much wealth they could accumulate by saving instead of paying in to Soc Sec, they would be much more willing to hear about reform ideas.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:32:00 +0000

Did I say ‘know’?

I think that after age 65 the likelihood of being diagnosed with cancer in your remaining lifetime is close to 50% Obviously other issues are much more likely. Maybe insurance would be worthwhile until someone is 85 – I don’t know. And I know the US government doesn’t know either. So the market should sort it out.