My fellow Trump voters; what's wrong with a mandatory insurance law ?

I always wondered how many Republican supporters or aware how much ObamaCare is a Republican construct.

Personally I think the Dems used it figuring it is something and since it was a GOP sanctioned plan for healthcare they would not resist it as much.

 

Because they're too good to allow people to choose otherwise.

 

we have mandatory insurance to drive a car.

mandatory insurance to own a house.

mandatory insurance to do construction.

 

Of course. It also goes without saying members of Congress and higher ups in the Judicial and Executive branches get to to keep their existing healthcare coverage also.

 

So by this logic, everything should be insured. your teeth should be insured against cavities, and your butt should be insured against hemorrhoids.

I remember when there wasn't any mandatory insurance. Then the lefties started worrying about what would happen if.... Then suddenly these mandatory insurance schemes started popping up, left and right.

So basically, you're just pointing to lefty legislation and saying "because we got this pushed through, you've got to allow it all!"

If you go outside, you take your chances. It's just how life in a free society works. Not everything is going to be insured in a free society. There will always be that one guy who doesn't have hair insurance when a stiff breeze throws his combover out of whack.

 

Somalia is calling for you - no mandatory requirements there...

I'll give you logic - lots of people have houses that get flooded and don't have insurance - they turn to the government - why not make those in flood areas or coasts have insurance so the rest of us don't have to pay for them?

 

Why would we have to pay for them? My toilet overflows, I don't come begging the government to send somebody over on your dime to clean up the mess.

If some rich guy with a mansion on the florida coast sees his mansion drifting out to sea because of a hurricane, I'm still wondering why I have to pick up the tab for that guy's house.

All you're doing is pointing to more stupid legislation that helps rich people at the expense of the poor and saying "we already take money from the poor to pay for the rich, so why not with health insurance!!!!".

I say no to all of it. You obviously looooooove it.

 

I love that you want

As I'm sure you know, it's been law for decades that hospitals cannot refuse patients. I'm not sure that it has anything to do with the hippocratic oath. You can preserve that law without having the mandate as we had for decades, though I would prefer that law to be repealed along with the individual mandate.

 

The government does not compel you to purchase a car. That's a voluntary choice.

 

I love that you think the number one priority in politics is the "abolition of progressivism" yet what is the heart of progressivism? Individuals can be sacrified to the state/collective/whole through force in order to achieve outcomes that the progressives see as desirable. Society cannot work without a bunch of "planners" ensuring we're all doing the right thing.

Supporting the individual mandate is the essence of progressivism. => We want everyone to be able to get healthcare whenever they want it, but then people have no incentive to buy insurance. Well, we'll force people to buy insurance to cover the last intervention. This is "progressive" thinking.

We should return to classical liberal values which says, the state is there to ensure property rights are protected and nothing more. I don't want people dying in the street just like no one else does. But the point is we don't use force to implement our desires because it can and will have disastrous effects which must be fixed by forcing more people to do more things (illustrated above). If we want people to have access to healthcare, let's all do what we can to ensure that through charity.

Meanwhile, we don't build our healthcare system on a pile of sand and wishful thinking. We base it on cold, hard facts and society in general gets wealthier when we allow for more liberty. Then we can take some of the wealth that comes out of that and use it to help the poor.

 

The system doesn't work without it being mandatory...and it still is. Only know it'll cost you a lot more if you have a coverage lapse and the money will go to insurance company profits

 

The MD who wrote the original National Healthcare Plan pitched it to me in 1995 over my father's diningroom table. He explained how all Americans would have to be covered. All adults would have to purchase the plan, all would be equally covered. Ten percent of premiums collected would be placed in a pool to cover those with pre-existing conditions. Those who could not afford the premium would be subsidised by the government on a sliding scale. The IRS would identify the citizens and report their income. At the time the author of the plan figured that a family of four would have to pay about $360 a month. Today more like $2,000. Democrats had a big confab in Florida to hash out the plan and it was there that it got sick. Many organizations such as the big unions were allowed to keep their existing insurance programs, which in effect killed the whole program. It went downhill from there. When people finally signed up most did so figuring their premiums would be subsidized. Fact is there are not enough healthy wealthy young people to pay for the insurance for old, sick poor people.

Now think back. Do you recall when medical care was cheap? It was before medicare and medical. It was when Blue Shield and Blue Cross provided the insurance (other companies too). Get the damn government out of the medical insurance business and the industry will figure out a way to provide the insurance. If we need insurance for a pre-existing condition then provide a policy that covers only that ailment as a supplement to their basic plan.

 

It is because they want us to be ruled by the government. We are not ruled by the government, but by our constitution and law.

 

The issue with the mandate its basically a blowjob to private insurance.

Here is how a healthcare bill should look.

1; No Mandate; Instead, you set set up a publically funded insurance system to cover anyone who can not afford private insurance. Bsically, wat Obama was gonna do originally. If you can afford private insurance, but choose not to buy it, **** off and die. No more tax coverage for insurance-less emergency room visits. If you willingly choose not to have insurance, you are responsible for 100% of all healthcare costs, with no support.
*There would still be a mandate that parents purchase insurance for minor children under the age of 18. Any parent failing to do so would be subject to child neglect charges. The right to choose not to have insurance would be for adults only.

2; National Insurance Database.
This is simple. Lift the ban on inter-state insurance sales, and set up a national database of all companies where a person can pick and choose the best companies.

3; No ban on sub-par insurance
This is one of the most common arguments against Obamacare. Under Obamacare, any insurance company which fails to meet national standards is banned from selling their insurance. Which means a lot of people lost of their shitty insurance and were forced to get Obamacare coverage. I would do it different. Instead of banning them, you allow them to keep doing business but with certain catches.
1; They have to inform all customers, and have a disclaimer on all advertisements that they fail to meet national minimum standards
2; They lose all tax benefits.... No credits, deductions, subsidies, grants, etc....
3; No government contracts. They won't be allowed to have contracts with the federal government or states, or countries, or localities.
4; They won't be allowed to be part of the national database.

4; FICA Reform
In order to pay for the added costs under this system, I would raise the tax taxable income cap to $1,000,000.00
In addition, to this, I would repeal the requirement that companies match their employees' FICA contribitions. Instead, I would establish a separate "Corporate FICA Tax" on companies' income, with a cap of $10,000,000.00.
The individual FICA medicare tax rate would be raised to 1.5%, while the corporate tax rate would be set at 3%

 

The Hippocratic oath means that patients always come first, even before profit. That's in essence the ethical basis of why hospitals can't turn patients away. Now, please elaborate on how we can have a free market when on side (the hospitals) cannot refuse service?

As to allowing hospitals to refuse treatment, get ready for people who could be cured dying for lack of funds. Not sure if the public would be prepared for such a system, which is in essence what the GOP envisions.

 

if the GOP messes this up, and its very likely they will, Medicare-for-All will be the only option left.

 

But it has nothing to do with ethical. I mean, it can if you want it to but it's the law, signed by Ronald Reagan. I don't think it's really worth debating whether denying someone coverage if they can't pay violates the Hippocratic oath.

The hospital problem alludes to the free rider problem. Demanding citizens purchase insurance doesn't solve the free rider problem, because individuals can still opt to just pay the tax penalty (currently) or the 30% penalty under the Republican plan. I can still not purchase health insurance, pay the penalty, and go get medical care. I can do the same under the Republican plan.

What's also interesting is that you seem to have a problem with people not paying for their medical care with respect to free riders, but aren't opposed to Medicare, Medicaid, or the pre-existing conditions mandate (recall Obamacare does not put those with pre-existing conditions in a special pool).

We're also talking about a minimal amount of healthcare spending. My back-of-the-envelope calculations show that uncompensated care makes up roughly 3% of healthcare spending, $84 billion. Compared to what others have to pay for others' healthcare with respect to Medicare, Medicaid, and the pre-existing conditions mandate (the principle of being opposed to freeriders) this is minimal.

Would you do something about that, in such a world?

 

I didn't vote for Trump. But the answer to your question should be obvious. Free men should not be compelled by their government to pay for an involuntary activity.

 

This issue is getting ridiculous.

Time for Medicare for all.

We are the only industrialized nation on Earth that does not have such a system.

It will save us around $500 billion a year in healthcare costs.

Its actually the CONSERVATIVE thing to do.

 

Should parents of minor children be required to buy life insurance enough to cover all costs of the children until all are 18, or should people be able to just "flip the bill to taxpayers?"

Shouldn't working people be required to buy lose of job due to injury insurance enough to cover their lifetime, rather than just flipping the bill for unemployment benefits?

Shouldn't people be required to buy mortgage insurance, rather than just flipping foreclosures on HUD and VA housing back to taxpayers?

Should pregnant women be required to buy insurance against birth defects of the child, enough to cover a lifetime of care for the child whatever that defect may be?

Shouldn't people be required to buy cremation or burial insurance, so they can't just flip the cost of indigent disposal to the government.

And shouldn't anyone would refuses to work enough to pay all that money to all those corporations be put in prison - for which shouldn't everyone have to buy insurance to cover the potential costs to the government of their potential imprisonment?

Indeed, aren't all born into servitude to corporations who bribe politicians to get on the approved list so no one needs government assistance? Isn't long overdue to ban On Walden Pond from schools, that damn bum!

 

This might be hard to conceive of, but there is another option. It's one that a ot of republicans don't have a problem with.

Can you guess what that alternative might be?

 

The insurance thing for people who are not poor is a real scam.
First, they mark up your bill 500% to cover the people that won't pay - and only a fool doesn't understand that no matter how much you "REQUIRE" people to buy insurance, tens of millions of people won't and many couldn't if they wanted to. Go require a street person, bum, alcoholic or druggie to "buy insurance." It's a joke.
Second, the standard practice MANY locations is that you only pay 50% IF you pay the bill in full in advance or immediately thereafter - but if you use insurance you are billed 100% - for which you owe at least 20% deductible - meaning you save what? 10%. Yet your insurance premiums cost FAR more than that 10% - so it literally if cheaper even to pay the absurd price markup to cover everyone else.
Overall, for people who can afford medical care it equates to someone providing zero service just cutting themselves in by using the government, courts, and police to take your money for NOTHING in return. Insurance companies do NOT provide medical services or any services whatsoever.

It is curious how now essentially everyone presumes that if a person was a bum and criminal all his life - and at 79 years old has a dead liver from alcoholism, has advanced Alzeheimers, and needs a heart transplant to maybe live another 6 months, we-the-people have an obligation to labor at work for 50,000 hours to pay for his medical needs. In real terms, socialism is slavery, ie you are forced to work to provide for others rather than yourself - other people who are not working to provide anything for you.

I say give him painkillers, put him in a bed in the corner and let him go.

I do not agree that healthcare is an entitlement. Am I the last person in the USA who thinks this???

 

You kind of missed the bigger picture. You should have the right to purchase WHAT LEVEL of coverage you feel is right for you. And that's a BIG problem with Oscama Care. You should be able to choose your own acceptable levels of risk and out of pocket exposure......and under this asshat kind of law, it's been deemed non-qualifying and put that type of "pay as your go until catastrophic" coverage out of business since it got outlawed. The Azzhole in Chief (Obummer) put the mandate in to throw the middle class under the bus, mandatory coverage with out of pockets that are astronomical to pay for the dead beats that get subsidies and basically pay zero. Eff them.

 

Me, me, me! (raises hand). So "other people" can pay for it? What do I win????

 

Health insurance is cheaper for everyone if everyone participates. People who don't participate end up as moochers anyway. The personal liberty cost is pretty minimal considering the significant societal good.