It's an interesting proposal, but it doesn't address regional differences in cost-of-living. Big difference in rents in Topeka, Kansas, and New York City.

You commented "It provides for a refundable tax credit to prevent premiums from exceeding a percentage of the family's income." but my comment is "What percentage is affordable?" Define affordable. I currently have 0% of my income available for premiums yet I make $15 and hour. I can't afford 2.5%, not 4%. I would not have enough money to cover a premium at 2.5% of my income because I am 100% extended on various other obligations.

As soon as affordable is defined, then the various proposals can be compared.

utahgirl

Posted at February 27, 2008 8:11 PM in response to Mandates versus Affordability

I get nervous when vague terms like affordability are used. Affordable by what standard? We need single payer and those people who truly have no level where premiums are affordable don't get gutted. Affordability varies by location. A person living in Oklahoma making $15/hour has a different level of affordability than one living in New York City and making $15/hour.

I wonder if any plan can truly create an equitable system of affordable premiums.

utahgirl

Posted at February 27, 2008 2:28 PM in response to Mandates versus Affordability