It's inconsistent to reject an applicant if they live with their parents, say a 30 yr old woman who is unemployed and living with her parents - one working and making 100K, because the household she lives under is financially secure.
One, isn't the government practically forcing the parents to pay for their daughter's medical coverage (annual check-ups, basic vaccinations) even if the ground rules laid by the parents is to not pay for such coverage? The daughter herself cannot pay for it since her annual income is a net zero, though she still has to file taxes regardless of her employment status. If we use the "it's inhumane for the government to 'let people die on the side of the street'" the government is not keeping its promise to provide for the daughter since she is unable to secure health coverage. Yes, the parents are letting her live under their roof, rent & utility bill free, but they will not provide no health coverage.
Two, the expansion of medicaid isn't really an expansion, just lip service.
No comments :
Post a Comment