That's true, but that is also what makes it work. You CAN opt out of driving. You CANNOT opt out of healthcare. Otherwise, the argument is the same, the logic the same. The need even greater with healthcare as no one can not be treated for healthcare.
We have statistical evidence, which has been linked, showing uninsured people do engage these services, are treated, and can't pay for it. This is a fact.
I disagree. The rational behind requiring drivers insurance is that if you cause harm to another person or their property (vehicle in most cases) you will be able to pay for the damages and make restitution. Mandating health insurance would be forcing someone to buy a product that the government deems is necessary for your personal well-being.
Actually you have a very good reason to believe it: I told you I didn't.
You show that you don't understand "adverse selection" and its application to insurance pools. It is not sick people that avoid purchasing health insurance, it is healthy ones that can get away without it.Actually, no.
The mandate is designed to offset premiums/costs which would otherwise skyrocket when insurance companies are forced to take on all comers without a risk analysis. It has nothing to do with "freeloaders."
That's why it's in the law. And that's what everyone says the tragedy will be if it's struck.
I disagree. The rational behind requiring drivers insurance is that if you cause harm to another person or their property (vehicle in most cases) you will be able to pay for the damages and make restitution. Mandating health insurance would be forcing someone to buy a product that the government deems is necessary for your personal well-being. The fact that driving is not a right also makes things different. A state issues a license based on a driver's proven abilities to properly operate a vehicle. The state government can remove you license to drive if you violate law. The ability to drive is not a Constitutionally defined right, a state can remove it. Being alive is a right under the constitution and I think as such the federal government (among other reasons) should not be able to mandate that all living individuals buy private health insurance or face a fine.
By definition, they are not engaging in commerce, they are engaging in theft.
Actually, no.
The mandate is designed to offset premiums/costs which would otherwise skyrocket when insurance companies are forced to take on all comers without a risk analysis. It has nothing to do with "freeloaders."
That's why it's in the law. And that's what everyone says the tragedy will be if it's struck.
You show that you don't understand "adverse selection" and its application to insurance pools. It is not sick people that avoid purchasing health insurance, it is healthy ones that can get away without it.
Several States already run high risk pools. And in the State of Texas the insurance companies have to cover the losses the high risk pool incurs.
Great. So?
It is a part of your premium. As well as all the uninsured that walk into the ER.
Actually, no.
The mandate is designed to offset premiums/costs which would otherwise skyrocket when insurance companies are forced to take on all comers without a risk analysis. It has nothing to do with "freeloaders."
That's why it's in the law. And that's what everyone says the tragedy will be if it's struck.
And you say a lot of things which have little in common with truth.
Hmmm. If they can "get away with it," then so much for the idea that they're "freeloaders" who are "already engaged."
Not that this post doesn't reinforce what I said, anyway.
:roll: The fact remains, the will be treated, a cost will need to be paid, and others will pay it one way or another.
Yes, that is part of the purpose (and of course why it is in effect a tax), but the purpose is also to encourage people to buy insurance and thus reduce the number of freeloaders.
Yeah, just like a murderer who gets away with it isn't really a murderer. :roll:
You wouldn't know the truth if it kicked a 2X4 up your ass.
His post ...Except that "get away with it" means "not get sick and need care," not get away with freeloading. That's the only way it makes sense in his post.
... which I interpret to mean get away without "health insurance". That doesn't mean that group never has heath problems, it means if they're healthy (i.e., young people with no major conditions) they don't buy insurance. Whether they end up being "freeloaders" or not is a matter of statistics. Statistically, some of those people will get seriously ill, have accidents, and/or develop a major medical condition like diabetes or high blood pressure and be unable to pay for treatment out-of-pocket.You show that you don't understand "adverse selection" and its application to insurance pools. It is not sick people that avoid purchasing health insurance, it is healthy ones that can get away without it.
The car insurance argument really isn't equatable. You are only forced to buy car insurance if you drive a car (A license to drive a car is a state issued privilege based on an individuals abilities, this license can be revoked if the law is broken). Every living adult woukd be forced to buy health insurance. Driving is not a right, living is. States can regulate the legality of driving and mandate that people have insurance in order to cover damages to another person's vehicle, the governemt is wanting to force all living adults to purchase a product or be fined.
Oh, please. You know how much you weasel and misrepresent things. There's no way you don't. So no, I don't find your word on your own activity terribly credible.
I'm afraid the insurance thing; which I'm sure has variations around the country is a precendent of exactly what the issue is: a government mandate to purchase. I'll be very surprised if tha issue is not brought up.
His post ...
... which I interpret to mean get away without "health insurance". That doesn't mean that group never has heath problems, it means if they're healthy (i.e., young people with no major conditions) they don't buy insurance. Whether they end up being "freeloaders" or not is a matter of statistics. Statistically, some of those people will get seriously ill, have accidents, and/or develop a major medical condition like diabetes or high blood pressure and be unable to pay for treatment out-of-pocket.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?