What's wrong with making it mandatory to buy Health Insurance ?

Well, insurance isn't really like gambling. Gambling implies a percentage of people will win the game. With health insurance the probability that people will either die suddenly with no medical options, or get sick, sometime in their lives, is 100%.

The "gamble" is guessing what you're going to get sick with, or injured, and that's where wise insurance purchases are useful.

There's little reason for men to take breast cancer coverage. It happens, but so rarely it's probably not worth buying. Damn few women get prostate cancer, no point in them paying for that coverage.

Young is synonymous wth "healthy", and why the hell should people in their twenties be forced to buy health insurcance simply because those funds are needed to cover old farts? They shouldn't be, is why. And the fantasy economic projection of MessiahCare was that the young wer going to subsidize the payments to the old. Can anyone name other programs and people seeking to implement policies like that?

Well, there was Charles Ponzi.

There was Bernie Madoff.

There was FDR and his Socialist Security Ponzi Scheme.

And now there's King Obama, Fascist and Traitor, and his very own Ponzi Scheme.

Yet King Obama's Ponzi Scheme is telling the young idiots that voted for him to either spend thousands on insurance they don't need, or pay the IRS Brownshirts $95 in fines....gee....seems like it might be almost deliberately engineered to fail, doesn't it? Like they're just working on the first layer of destroying the health care industry before claiming capitalism fails completely, fascism in medicine is the only way to go? What else could it be? Everyone on the Left admits that King Obama and all of his cronies are smarter than Einstein, Edison, and Hillary combined.

Keep your eye out for the metaphorical Reichstag Fire.

 

You right wingers have gone full retard on this.

The government is not forcing someone to purchase a members only jacket - that's not a necessity.
The government is forcing people to purchase health insurance instead of expecting the tax payer to pay for it. If you're a "young person" (like that phucking matters since anyone at any age can get hurt or get sick) and you refuse to buy insurance today and end up doing something stupid and end up in the ER, guess who pays for it ?! JOE TAXPAYER, that's who. And that's not right. Under Obamacare, this "young person" will be forced to buy health insurance and I'm all for it.

 

Sure, it's not identical - you're gambling that your claimable health bill will top the cost of the insurance, and by definition this is not true on average - or they'd be out of business. So why force people to make a bet that's unwise some of the time? So the government isn't guilted into paying for their treatment when they get sick? Government's guilty conscience/false compassion isn't a valid reason to coerce people into its solution. If government is really sorry for these people then they should actually listen to what they want - and allow them to make an individual choice.

Absolutely, for the vast majority health insurance is a good bet - especially if you have a family and are short on savings. But there remains this small percentage of people, such as myself - who have no desire to have health insurance at the moment. I don't expect government to provide for me if this gamble goes wrong - but I do expect them to stay out of my business.

I'd have no problem with a mandate so long as there was an alternative where you could give away your "right" to have hospitals help you in emergencies, and other state-provided concessions. Let those who want to take personal responsibility, and let the rest have their insurance. Then it's not really a mandate, it's just a condition for the government giving aid.

Social security.

Also, I completely agree!

The left is always going on about corporate collusion with government - they need look no further than Obamacare. Sure, some parts are anti-corporate like the pre-existing conditions restrictions, but by and large it's a gift to the large insurance companies, and a plague on the smaller ones/free market competition in general.

 

You asked what's wrong with mandatory insurance - who did you think would object to such a thing?

The fact of the matter is the average democrat/liberal isn't well enough informed about history, economics, or governmental systems to understand why it's a bad thing.

In case you haven't noticed, your liberal misleaders have all but bankrupted municipalities, states, the national treasury, and posterity - and you want to allow them to make healthcare decisions for 350 million people?

As some have explained in this thread, the problems we currently have are all generated by government meddling in the free market. Bureaucracy can't help but add layer upon layer of cost and ineffeciency - I assume you were never taught that in the government indoctrination center you attended.

 

Making mandatory the purchase of health insurannce is a form of aggression, in this case initiated by government, which violates the liberties and freedoms of those it is imposed upon.

 

Why is it a necessity and who should determine that it is a necessity?

The fact is that it is government involvement in the healthcare system (mainly via lobbying originating through corporate person hood) is what created this mess, and involving more government will not solve it.

Again, it never ceases to amaze me that progressives create a problem via government intervention, and when the wheels fall off continues to think the answer is even more government intervention. In reality, it only exasperates the issue further.

 

What's wrong is that it should never had to be mandatory.

It's mandatory because it sucks.

It should be such a good deal that it doesn't have to be mandatory.

Medicare isn't mandatory.

It doesn't have to be.

Almost everyone in this country that is eligible signs up as soon as they turn 65.

Is it mandatory to sign up for coverage the UK?

France?

Canada?

 

how about the best of both worlds, a public hospital like we have public schools, but if someone wants to they can go to a private doctor

 

Uh, are you sure you meant that comparison?

 

The government doesnt make you buy a car. Thats your choice to own one. The insurance is to ensure other parties are covered in case your bad driving causes injury to them during an accident.
Forcing healthcare is a tax on simply being alive. A choice no one got to make.
A better question to ask yourself is, is it ok for the government to make you buy vegetables? I mean youre already eating stuff anyways.
If you say no it is not ok for the govt to make you buy vegetables then you have disproved your own thread.

 

So, higher taxes and larger premiums for people who already buy insurance was to protect their money against the poor?

 

They already have government hospitals and clinics. They are expensive, and poorly run. Look at Walter Reed a few years back. VA hospitals are another thing tht needs to go. Give all the vets full healthcare. My great uncle flew in over German lines in a hang glider just before D day. Now he lives out in BFE Ocala because of his health he wants to be closer to the hospital. We owe these people more then government run programs.

- - - Updated - - -

Medicare is mandatory. You pay for it your whole life, it is one of the worst investments you can make, so of course, you have no choice.

 

well lets see, can't afford medical care or can afford medical care, which do you think the poor should choose

some public schools have issues, mine was great, we just need to keep working at it... always room for improvement

anything is better then nothing and we can always work to improve the system... rather then do NOTHING


.

 

Why don't your support Paul Ryan's voucher plan then? Doesn't it make the poor able to buy insurance without all these extra public layers? You know the average kid in public school costs more then the average kid at a superior private school? There is nothing that is free, everything costs money. Those government doctors are going to want better then private sector pay and pensions, just like the teachers. 6 figure administrators wil pop up all over the country, they will be unaccountable to you, but you will have to pay them despite their performance.

 

I think you mean "Can't afford insurance". Which isn't the same thing as medical care.

Indeed, when you look cash payments out of hospitals, they are cases where they are lower than the co-pay. Such is how inefficient our system has become.

Actually, if Gov't had done nothing to begin with (meaning, the 1960s), this would wouldn't be problem.

As it stands, what we have is a Government getting more involved in the system in order to head-off effects its own policies has caused. I say, end the cluster f*ck, do as we did with the Airlines and deregulate.

 

Car insurance is only mandatory when you actually own and operate a vehicle. That insurance is mandatory through the state government, as well. You're comparing apples to oranges.

The federal government cannot coerce citizens to purchase a service because they have no enumerated power in the Constitution allowing them to do so. You'd think liberals would actually read the Constitution.

 

And of course that is simply extortion.

Your logic fails because when I went to the ER with no insurance I paid for it. Nobody else did.

Only scumbags and idiots agree with mandatory insurance laws.

 

When I started driving you didnt have to buy car insurance... All car insurance is is to pay for other peoples bad driving skills all health insurance is is to pay for other people unhealthy life styles.Your forcing me to pay for you...

 

Thats the thing they are forcing you kids to pay for us old guys, instead of saving your money or going on vactions or whatever. If I was in my 20's I would be ticked off that I have to pay for health insurance instead of going to Vegas with the money.

 

lol you are hopeless, you drink from the fountain of fascist apologists.

 

Dunno how it works in the UK, France or Canada, but here's how it works in Australia.

Australia has two systems running side by side, private health insurance and a universal single payer healthcare system, Medicare. Wage and salary earners are levied 1.5% (which can also be tax deductable if your accountant is smart). One family member, normally the one earing the most contributes, usually wife (if she's not working or under the income threshold) and children are listed as dependents. Anyone earning less than 16,000 AUD ( I think) is exempt but still gets full coverage. Those earning over a certain amount contribute an extra 1% if they aren't also privately insured.

There is also a Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme where by considerably subsidises on a range of prescription medications is available.

Around 50% of Australians are privately insured, as well as covered under Medicare. For what services aren't all that clear. I'd say things like dental, physiotherapy, ambulance etc are covered by private health insurance, but services like hospital, emergency and general medical procedures, GP visits etc people mostly use Medicare.

To add,, I've got private health insurance which is designed for expats working in foreign countries. It covers me for hospital, dental, emergency, GP visits etc. Costs me $900 per year. I'm also covered when I go back to Australia. It covers me in every country around the world,,,,, except America.

 

Your coverd in America.. no one is turned away from a hospital, last I heard it is against the law in Canada to buy private insurance~ In January, the hip doctor told her that a narrowing of the spine was compressing her nerves and causing the pain. She needed a back specialist. The appointment was set for
Sept. 30. "When I was given that date, I asked when could I expect to have surgery," said Woodkey, 72. "They said it would be a year and a half after I had seen this doctor." So this month, she drove across the border into Montana and got the $50,000 surgery done in two days. "I don't have insurance. We're not allowed to have private health insurance in Canada,
articles.latimes.com/2009/sep/27/nation/na-healthcare-canada27

 

There are always the exceptional cases.

Ten years ago, our daughter then aged 18 had a horrific car accident. Critical condition at the scene, stabilised then ferried to hospital. Internal injuries, head injuries, and a badly broken right femur. Nine hours on the operating table, titanium rod inserted into her femur and a two week stay in hospital. Medicare picked up the tab, no money exchanged hands.

Ten years down the road, she still has the rod in her femur which should have been removed some years ago, but you know young people. A couple of months ago, the orthopaedic who operated on her contacted her (out of the blue) to let her know he can fit her into his schedule by mid June this year. Taking into account this is elective surgery.

 

Right.

Good luck with that.

http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v1n4/healthy.html

 

Personally I would rather see a tax supported government run health care system, and I think we will get there eventually, since it's the most efficient way to provide a nation with health care.
But we move slowly, so mandatory health insurance, to single payer, to federally funded clinics and hospitals, takes a while, but it's inevitable.