Posted on 09/10/2012 3:36:03 AM PDT by tobyhill
apparently Romney can only play hardball against conservatives :/
my optimism about this election is fading.
How does Romney exPect us to fight for him when he wOnt even fFight for himsElf
There are tons of people who go to college later in life. Not everyone attends right after high school.
Even with this explicit statement, does anyone think the cost increase will influence the college vote?
Yo, pubbie campaign, another point to make hay with.
I went back to college at age 29. I didn't get insurance. It wasn't required.
Romney seems intent on testing the theory that in troubled economic times the challenger just needs to assure voters that he is capable of taking the reigns and nothing else.
Well will see in a few weeks if that theory holds water.
Wait...Didn’t the maximum age of a “student” remaining on mom and dad’s insurance get bumped up to 26 not too long ago? What’s the fuss?
Other places a union may have negotiated a deal where the gub'mnt pays 100% ~
With postal employees it's 10%. With other federal employees it's 28%.
Since health bennies are just part of the total compensation package the only real difference is how much federal personal income tax is going to be paid ~ with a lower government share, the tax will be imposed on the employees. With a higher government share the employees will pay less income tax.
I've often thought it exceedingly curious that we have Conservatives whose biggest goal in life is to raise government employee's percentage of direct payment of health care so they can pay more income taxes.
That's a tax increase folks. All that does is make them demand a higher salary! And, of course, you know where those gub'mnt salaries come from eh!
No you don't actually. Postal salaries come from postage. By offloading 90% of the health benefit segment of compensation to the USPS directly, it is NOT TAXED. That allows the company to negotiate a better deal with the unions, and thereby pass through the income tax savings to the mailers ~ that's you!
Slick deal!
That would be correct....all can be covered under parents policy (and their carrier must accept them) regardless of education, work, if not insured at work, or marital status.
Everyone has been royally Fluked.
Romney certainly needs to attack Obama’s failure to correct deficiencies in the medical insurance market and to push for tort reform. However, arguing against the immediate rise in student medical insurance is kind of a cheap political point: It ignores the bigger issues of pricing of medical insurance in general. Pricing of insurance embeds a host of actuarial and arbitrary value assumptions. If you set insurance rates by the age of the insured for the upcoming year, then the premiums for young adults will be low and those for folks in their 60s and above will be astronomical. The market needs to come up with the equivalent of level term life insurance, where buying into a long term policy essentially spreads the risks and costs across a much longer period than a year. If folks decide to not pay insurance when they are young, then they must anticipate paying higher premiums when they need it later on.
I know of insurance agencies that haven’t been able to place an individual health policy in months.
The irony of this is the law now says your child must be on your education until age 26 - normally past a college graduate so not sure who this will affect other then masters programs.
We got the letter for our daughter saying if we did not prove she was covered by insurance they would tack on 1,300 to her tuition. Went on line with the insurance the family has and saved that. Course I pay for it anyway so they are just looking at more revenue streams.
The irony of this is the law now says your child must be on your education until age 26 - normally past a college graduate so not sure who this will affect other then masters programs.
We got the letter for our daughter saying if we did not prove she was covered by insurance they would tack on 1,300 to her tuition. Went on line with the insurance the family has and saved that. Course I pay for it anyway so they are just looking at more revenue streams.
It impacts people who do not have other health insurance or cannot add their children because of price or other issues. School insurance was a life saver for me as a single Mom.
Well, a lot of "kids" aged 30 and above are still "students"......they might be part Cherokee too.
FMCDH(BITS)
I work for the Fed. My bi-weekly premium is approx. 25% of the basic plan’s cost.
Interesting. I went to a private college in the late 80s. The issue never came up.
It’s a racket. I understand they need to spread the cost but it’s unfair that you can’t opt out. When I went it was about $120 a year at a state school as a “Health Services Fee” that you paid along with your tuition and other fees. It’s 10-20x that now. Gotta pay for those “free” condoms.
No - the ultimate goal is government health care. And easy enough to do with gov’t insurance. Only paying the doctors for the procedures and to whom the gov’t wants.
What if your parents are dead....or even unemployed and therefore, uninsured?
There are probably far more college students that are unable to get coverage under their parents’ policies, for one reason or another, than there are that can. And these are the people Obama is counting on to help vote him back into office....lol!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.