BTW, I am 54 years old. If I lose my insurance through a corporation, then I am fucked. I have kidney damage, but not kidney failure. If I were on dialysis, then I would be Medicare eligible automatically. There are a lot of people like me out there. Cut off our medical insurance, and we'll end up on dialysis. Trust me when I tell you that the cost of keeping me off dialysis is nothing compared to what the cost of keeping me on it would be.
You talk like a fool, or someone with guaranteed government healthcare. Which is it?
I suppose you'd only be screwed if you got your MS diagnosis while you didn't have health insurance. But I'm positive there are options here.
How long must COBRA continuation coverage be available to a qualified beneficiary?
Up to 18 months for covered employees, as well as their spouses and their dependents, when workers otherwise would lose coverage because of a termination or reduction of hours.
Up to 29 months is available to employees who are determined to have been disabled at any time during the first 60 days of COBRA coverage and applies as well to the disabled employee's nondisabled qualified beneficiaries.
Up to 36 months for spouses and dependents facing a loss of employer-provided coverage due to an employee's death, a divorce or legal separation, or certain other "qualifying events".
Not to mention the cost.
Then we clearly have two different definitions of what we mean by regulation. Laws preventing theft, murder, and loss of liberty are not the same as private business and private persons operating their private property as they see fit.
Clearly, if you truly believe that what I mean by a business being unregulated meaning I wish for the absence of law, then I don't know how to discuss this.
I don't know of anyone who is suggesting that.
Had Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac not been backed by government protection, then they all would have gone the way of the Do Do bird. Someone made it possible for the bad loans to go somewhere. It was the Government. The government created these institutons under the guise of "regulation" in order to control things and made it much worse.
When people actually have to take great risk that could lead to thier demise they are usually much more careful. These regs did just the opposite.
Also there are potential issues where new technology creates new opportunities for illicit behavior. Shouldn't those who oversee these industries put regulations in to place to govern or restrict these behavior or should be just let them go on until the government passes a law to make them illegal?
Don't get me wrong, I totally accept the fact that businesses are over regulated. However, without some regulation you open a door to industrial anarchy.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|