home
On S-CHIP: Send Him The Same Bill | 44 comments (44 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

S-CHIP (5.00 / 1) (#16)
by tnthorpe on Wed Oct 03, 2007 at 02:42:26 PM EST
is run by states, so that South Dakota sets its limit at 140% of the Federal Poverty Level and New Jersey at 350%. Insurance affordability isn't as clear a matter as it seems, neither is eligibility. The CBO estimates that for every hundred new S-CHIP members, 20-25% will be transfers from the private insurance sector. Are these people "choosing" to let others pay for them? I don't think that characterizes the nature of what they're doing very well. When confronted with high costs of housing, transportation, education, and insurance many families are simply unable to cope. S-CHIP is rightly directed at people who are having a very hard time making ends meet and it helps them protect their children. I can't see anything objectionable in that.


[ Parent ]
Let's get it on!!! (1.00 / 0) (#17)
by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 03, 2007 at 03:03:26 PM EST
How about NHC for ALL children under age of 19??

We can use a national sales tax to pay for it. And,of course, we will exempt basic necessities such as unprepared food, utilities (cellphone service and anything but basic cable/satellite excluded), soap, washing detergent, tooth paste, etc.... to make it fair. We will charge a higher tax for restaurant food, and all new automobiles above, say, $30,000 sticker price..

[ Parent ]

The accountants' lobby would love that (5.00 / 0) (#23)
by roy on Wed Oct 03, 2007 at 03:47:22 PM EST
Does fruit count as prepared if it's clean enough to eat?  If I can get cuts of uncooked meat without tax, how about chunks of raw fish cut into sashimi-size pieces?  Does parsley count as food if I use it as garnish?  How about pumpkins used to make jack-o-lanterns?  Is smoked meat prepared, or merely preserved?  Is deodorant soap (top o' the mornin' to ye) soap?

Every single product up for sale will be subject to a whole new category of, er, categorization.  The beurocracy necessary to beurocrate everything will probably cost more than the taxes will bring in.  We'll have to raise taxes on some categories to pay for figuring out the taxes on the old categories.  It'll spiral until everybody in the country is a tax-coder except for one guy who we're all following around the grocery store sticking bar codes on items as he picks them up and who can't make up his mind between ketchup (tax code A9QP7O) and catsup (A9QP70).

Not to mention giving unscrupulous businesses a new system to game, wooing tax coders to assign their competitors to "luxury" status while assigning their own goods as exempt necessities.  Well, not to not mention it, but to mention it in some detail, then again pointless tangent.

If I use my exempt prescription drugs recreationally, will I be charged with tax evasion?  Will calculators be exempt, because they'll be necessary to keep track of the combinations of local and national taxes while shopping?


[ Parent ]

picky picky picky ;-) (1.00 / 0) (#28)
by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 03, 2007 at 05:28:05 PM EST
Yes, it has its disadvantages, but not nearly was bad as you make out.

Plus, it gets everyone. The illegal aliens, the dope dealers, the Ebay merchants...everybody gets to contribute...

Of course if you still insist that it is too complicated, I'd settled for 7% on everything...

[ Parent ]

Well, that's the difference then. (none / 0) (#19)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Oct 03, 2007 at 03:14:20 PM EST
The 20-25% who previously chose to buy health insurance and who will now choose to avail themselves of "free" gvt funded health insurance are not "choosing" in your book. I don't agree. So be it.

[ Parent ]
btw, the CBO actually estimates over 33% (none / 0) (#25)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Oct 03, 2007 at 04:51:41 PM EST
of those choosing to afford insurance now will switch to having the rest of the US pay for it for them.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that about 3.8 million of those uninsured children would get government coverage under the bill. It also estimates that about 2 million children now covered by private insurance would switch to SCHIP.
2/(3.8 + 2) = 34%, not 20-25% as yous said. Just for the record.

[ Parent ]
Is that so bad? (5.00 / 0) (#30)
by kdog on Wed Oct 03, 2007 at 06:28:41 PM EST
So the insurance companies have 2 million less people to rip off....boo-hoo for the insurance companies.

[ Parent ]

On S-CHIP: Send Him The Same Bill | 44 comments (44 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft