|Authored by: TemporalBeing on Monday, July 09 2012 @ 04:13 PM EDT|
Do you have any evidence for this claim?
They may not pay the entire bill, but they will
certainly pay a lot more than the insurance companies would be. However,
bankruptcy does not guarantee that the bill will be fully reprieved, just that
payment will be made more manageable. You may still pay 100% of the original
bill but over a longer time period at more management payments. Or you may pay
0% of the original bill. It's all a matter of how the court restructures it.
If they declare bankruptcy, they don't pay the entire bill and may or may not
cover the costs. If they don't cover the cost, that leaves something for you and
me to pay.
... home improvements require the home owner to
spend money first (participation), then they get a tax credit (incentive) for
As to you request for evidence - look at the court system. Yes, I've
known people that have been in those situations, and did just that. There's a
proper place for it; and you're primary evidence will be in the court system
The difference between this example and the healthcare act
is one of terminology only. The healthcare act requires a person to spend money
first on health insurance, then they get an incentive in the form of relief from
the tax penalty.
No it's not the same incentive and it is very
different relief. And no, it's not a matter of semantics.
It's the same situation but you frame them
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]