Subject:
|
Re: Gay Marriage
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 18 Jun 2004 17:12:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2622 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Thomas Stangl wrote:
> Again, I don't see a problem with this, as long as the family unit as a
> whole is pulling their fair share of the insurance burden for the insurance
> company/public at large.
And that's all a matter for the individual insurance companies to work out with
their customers, right?
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Gay Marriage
|
| (...) Absent regulation preventing them from doing so, yes. However, in the world today insurance companies are heavily regulated as to who they can or can't cover and how they go about determining risk factors or premiums. So, no. Unfortunately. (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Gay Marriage
|
| I don't see a problem with this either, except.... Some insurance companies essentially provide a "Bulk Discount" for dependents - the more you have, the less you pay per dependent. I think this is wrong. You are encouraging multiple dependents in (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
218 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
