coolbeans said:
Key word: COMPETITION. I used that "tenfold" (not in a literal use) figure to reveal the potential of smaller health insurance companies affected by the over-regulatory nature seen across certain states, effectively locking them out. Actually, popular health economists at University of Minnesota project a national insurance market would increase health coverage by 49% in NJ and 22% in NY for starters. Maybe it's b/c that terminology is meant to get a simplified point across to a general public? You know that's not all such a policy entails, right? Such a bill would have more than "allow insurances across any state line" written so I'm not sure what's your angle here. |
Yes, I've read that. I've also read all the counter arguments. Do I really have to link them?
http://www.aei.org/publication/the-pros-and-cons-of-selling-health-insurance-across-state-lines/
Seriously, I'm not going to copy/paste. Just read it yourself. There is an entire host of arguments against it, some of them also by popular professors.
As for my "angle", I don't even know what you're talking about. You mean me asking why you said "tenfold"? I asked because ... you said it? If it's not true then don't say it.








