[Hugh the Scot]

Would the benefit be any different than if the employer paid for the employee's groceries?

Well, yes. We actually had an arrangement like that at one time, it was called slavery.

You might call it "theft," but taxing the employee for the plan would be -- well, taxation.

That's what I said, theft.

So what? For some of my insurance -- through a professional association, for example -- I have access to an insurance pool that's much larger than my employer's insurance pool.

And you'd like the government to take that option away from corporations and their employees who don't otherwise belong to a professional association?

Yes. I'm not sure what this means. Are you suggesting I'm opposed to any of this?

You seemed to be suggesting that the government take some non-specific action to enforce your point of view on employer subsidized insurance. Did I misread that?

[Alberta's Child]

Well, yes. We actually had an arrangement like that at one time, it was called slavery.

Exactly. I came across an article in the last couple of weeks that said record numbers of Americans are staying in jobs they don't like because they need the insurance coverage. Sound familiar?

And you'd like the government to take that option away from corporations and their employees who don't otherwise belong to a professional association?

I don't want the government to take anything away. I want the government to treat all of this equally. My disability insurance premiums should be subject to the same tax treatment as my medical insurance premiums -- one way or another. And medical costs should be subject to the same tax treatment regardless of how they're paid. If I pay $10,000 out of my pocket for a medical procedure and you get the same procedure done by a doctor who is paid by your insurance carrier, then we should both have the same tax treatment.

Also -- look at the grossly unfair tax treatment of employer-paid medical insurance plans vs. individual plans. If your employer pays $6,000/year for your coverage, it's 100% tax deductible. If I pay $6,000/year for my own, it's not. What planet am I on where anyone -- especially a conservative -- thinks this actually makes sense?

You seemed to be suggesting that the government take some non-specific action to enforce your point of view on employer subsidized insurance. Did I misread that?

No. See my prior point. The only action I want the government to take would be to get the hell out of the health care business entirely -- and that includes eliminating anything in the tax code related to health care costs, too.