ST Alpha - "It's a mandate for the insurance company. They CAN'T not insure them. -- nm" (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Login
Create Account

Search Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...

RSS Feed

Hosting by DigitalOcean

Support ST on Ko-Fi

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 152

In response to "no, that's not a mandate. the parent is not forced to cover their 26 year old. they can choose to or not to if they want" by encyclopedia pixie

It's a mandate for the insurance company. They CAN'T not insure them. -- nm

Posted by bacon via droid (aka redmond) Jan 29 '12, 00:00

(No message)

Responses:

wrong -- nm - Trish Jan 29, 00:10 8
- Oh then insurance companies can drop kids and not offer policies? Wow, Obama is telling people tghat's one of his big achievments. must be lying -- nm - bacon via droid Jan 29, 00:16 7
  - You realize it's not mandate when it's for companies right? Mandate refers to individuals - tRu Pad Jan 29, 00:25 1
    - I have a copy of the ADA law (americans with Disabilities Act) with me daily and it refers to the mandate that companies shall have X Y Z in new const - bacon via droid Jan 29, 01:06
  - from the site - bacon via droid Jan 29, 00:21 4
    - forcing insurance companies to accept premium payments for adult children = not a mandate - encyclopedia pixie Jan 29, 00:25 3
      - I looked up mandate and the def is making something manditory. Using your words "forcing". having no choice but to do a manditory requirement - bacon via droid Jan 29, 00:40 2
        
        seriously, stick to quarterbacks. you're embarrassing yourself - encyclopedia pixie Jan 29, 00:43 1
        
        There is more than one mandate in the bill - bacon via droid Jan 29, 00:45
you should stick to football arguments -- nm - encyclopedia pixie Jan 29, 00:02

Post a message top

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.