Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Punished for lack of children

I’ll state first that I hate the idea of the national health care plan in its present form.  Let me get this straight, I’ll have a higher tax (since I have “good” insurance) put on me to help people that make unhealthy life style choices?  Um, how about not.  When we have a country that has more obesity, more diabetes, more heart issues, and more high blood pressure, I’m not interested in creating a nice fat incentive to maintain those ills that can be solved by making better personal decisions.  While we’re at it, pass health care and legalize marijuana within a year of each other?  Please.

Well, now I’m going to have to pay for people having children as well.  Up until this point, the cost for each dependent was $70, and families only had to pay for up to five dependents.  Well, dependent costs are now going through the roof, and I received this in the mail:image

Something seems totally not right that a family that decides to have more children will actually benefit more than a family that focuses on their career and doesn’t have children.  If you decide to have five children, pay for them to have health insurance.  Don’t have kids if you really can’t afford them.  That’s not being mean, that’s called an affluent society. 

What I’d really like to do is opt out of my insurance.  I basically pay for insurance that I never use because the deductible is $1,000 a year, and on top of that my wife’s insurance covers me much better.  With the money I save on this insurance, I can buy supplemental insurance that is better, and save money for extra incidentals that might occur.  For some reason, I’m constantly told that I don’t have a choice, I can’t opt out.

Is that true?  In California, do you have to stay with the insurance of your employer?      

blog comments powered by Disqus