In several states you can purchase an auto without insurance, if you post a bond, same could be done with healthcare.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
In several states you can purchase an auto without insurance, if you post a bond, same could be done with healthcare.
Not exactly....We're forced to go to the state for criminal prosecutions.A newborn does NOT have that choice. So no...it is not a choice.
Dont avoid the reality of the bill... for GOOD OR BAD......it will be the first time in our history that an individual is mandated to buy something with no choice whasover....
Such a mandate truly needs to be analyzed before signed into law
Not exactly....We're forced to go to the state for criminal prosecutions.A newborn does NOT have that choice. So no...it is not a choice.
Dont avoid the reality of the bill... for GOOD OR BAD......it will be the first time in our history that an individual is mandated to buy something with no choice whasover....
Such a mandate truly needs to be analyzed before signed into law
Somehow, I don't think O.J. would have got away with murder if the Browns and Goldmans could have paid for the bet prosecutors they could find.
If you are one to believe that the government should not be able to force an individual to purchase insurance...
and if you are one to believe that the government should not be able to force a privately-owned insurance corporation to cover every individual regardless of their risk or ability to pay...
then you must also be one to believe that the government should not be able to force a privately owned hospital to treat every individual that comes in, regardless of ability or means or intention to pay.
Wrong.If you are one to believe that the government should not be able to force an individual to purchase insurance...
and if you are one to believe that the government should not be able to force a privately-owned insurance corporation to cover every individual regardless of their risk or ability to pay...
then you must also be one to believe that the government should not be able to force a privately owned hospital to treat every individual that comes in, regardless of ability or means or intention to pay.
Wrong.If you are one to believe that the government should not be able to force an individual to purchase insurance...
and if you are one to believe that the government should not be able to force a privately-owned insurance corporation to cover every individual regardless of their risk or ability to pay...
then you must also be one to believe that the government should not be able to force a privately owned hospital to treat every individual that comes in, regardless of ability or means or intention to pay.
Indigent care is paid for locally, at least where I live. It's part of our property taxes. For the public hospital district. Private hospitals don't have to provide indigent care, but do anyway in life-threatening circumstances.
But of course, you're deflecting away from the primary issue, erecting a feel-good strawman in order to do so.
Yes, a PRIVATE hospital can and does "ship" non life-threatening indigent cases to the public hospitals.Wrong.If you are one to believe that the government should not be able to force an individual to purchase insurance...
and if you are one to believe that the government should not be able to force a privately-owned insurance corporation to cover every individual regardless of their risk or ability to pay...
then you must also be one to believe that the government should not be able to force a privately owned hospital to treat every individual that comes in, regardless of ability or means or intention to pay.
Indigent care is paid for locally, at least where I live. It's part of our property taxes. For the public hospital district. Private hospitals don't have to provide indigent care, but do anyway in life-threatening circumstances.
But of course, you're deflecting away from the primary issue, erecting a feel-good strawman in order to do so.
I am doing no such thing. I am discussing an issue that I would like to discuss, which I had brought up in another thread which is being ignored.
As for not having to provide care...that is absolutely wrong. A hospital is mandated to provide care for anyone that shows up. They are legally not allowed to ship non-paying individuals to different hospitals. And locally here, indigent care is given for free...the cost of which is handed on to other paying customers.
Wrong.If you are one to believe that the government should not be able to force an individual to purchase insurance...
and if you are one to believe that the government should not be able to force a privately-owned insurance corporation to cover every individual regardless of their risk or ability to pay...
then you must also be one to believe that the government should not be able to force a privately owned hospital to treat every individual that comes in, regardless of ability or means or intention to pay.
Indigent care is paid for locally, at least where I live. It's part of our property taxes. For the public hospital district. Private hospitals don't have to provide indigent care, but do anyway in life-threatening circumstances.
But of course, you're deflecting away from the primary issue, erecting a feel-good strawman in order to do so.
I am doing no such thing. I am discussing an issue that I would like to discuss, which I had brought up in another thread which is being ignored.
As for not having to provide care...that is absolutely wrong. A hospital is mandated to provide care for anyone that shows up. They are legally not allowed to ship non-paying individuals to different hospitals. And locally here, indigent care is given for free...the cost of which is handed on to other paying customers.
Happened to me, in Asheville, NC.Yes, a PRIVATE hospital can and does "ship" non life-threatening indigent cases to the public hospitals.
I suppose the primary difference is that the IRS has far more experience in enforcing the collection of the money than any new agency would.
Not exactly....We're forced to go to the state for criminal prosecutions.A newborn does NOT have that choice. So no...it is not a choice.
Dont avoid the reality of the bill... for GOOD OR BAD......it will be the first time in our history that an individual is mandated to buy something with no choice whasover....
Such a mandate truly needs to be analyzed before signed into law
Somehow, I don't think O.J. would have got away with murder if the Browns and Goldmans could have paid for the bet prosecutors they could find.
if we OPT to prosecute.
Point well made, but, again, there is an option there.
There is absolutely no option involved in the madate of this bill.....at least for the first several years of your life.
It will be historic if passed...and open the floodgates to many other "choices" we currently enjoy.
Not exactly....We're forced to go to the state for criminal prosecutions.
Somehow, I don't think O.J. would have got away with murder if the Browns and Goldmans could have paid for the bet prosecutors they could find.
if we OPT to prosecute.
Point well made, but, again, there is an option there.
There is absolutely no option involved in the madate of this bill.....at least for the first several years of your life.
It will be historic if passed...and open the floodgates to many other "choices" we currently enjoy.
You make some very good points.
I'm still not sure I see it as quite as slippery a slope as you do though.
Children wouldn't be forced to pay for health care...but their parents may be. Seems like a cons dream.A lot of people seem to have especially strong opposition to requiring people to carry health insurance. Opposition based on principal I understand. It's just one more governmental encroachment on individual liberty. But from a practical standpoint, I don't really see why this is such a big deal (IMO the public option is a far worse idea).
What is the difference between a law that mandates you buy health insurance and a law that mandates you pay taxes to cover your own health insurance (and likely other's too)?
Simple answer....
You only are forced to pay taxes if you opt to have an income.
FOr the first time in our history, you are forced by government to buy something the very second you are born....and this mandate is with you for your entire life.
There is absolutely no option....no choice.....and it will lead to other choices lost as time goes on.
It is not about healthcare.......Conservatives are not against the healthcare part.......it is about government mandates.
Children wouldn't be forced to pay for health care...but their parents may be. Seems like a cons dream.A lot of people seem to have especially strong opposition to requiring people to carry health insurance. Opposition based on principal I understand. It's just one more governmental encroachment on individual liberty. But from a practical standpoint, I don't really see why this is such a big deal (IMO the public option is a far worse idea).
What is the difference between a law that mandates you buy health insurance and a law that mandates you pay taxes to cover your own health insurance (and likely other's too)?
Simple answer....
You only are forced to pay taxes if you opt to have an income.
FOr the first time in our history, you are forced by government to buy something the very second you are born....and this mandate is with you for your entire life.
There is absolutely no option....no choice.....and it will lead to other choices lost as time goes on.
It is not about healthcare.......Conservatives are not against the healthcare part.......it is about government mandates.
Yes, a PRIVATE hospital can and does "ship" non life-threatening indigent cases to the public hospitals.
Not really. If you are homeless you are subject to arrest.Children wouldn't be forced to pay for health care...but their parents may be. Seems like a cons dream.Simple answer....
You only are forced to pay taxes if you opt to have an income.
FOr the first time in our history, you are forced by government to buy something the very second you are born....and this mandate is with you for your entire life.
There is absolutely no option....no choice.....and it will lead to other choices lost as time goes on.
It is not about healthcare.......Conservatives are not against the healthcare part.......it is about government mandates.
Mandate...children will be mandated to be covered at a cost.....first time in our history ANYONE will be madated BY GOVERNMENT to spend money.....without any option whatsoever.
Wrong.
Indigent care is paid for locally, at least where I live. It's part of our property taxes. For the public hospital district. Private hospitals don't have to provide indigent care, but do anyway in life-threatening circumstances.
But of course, you're deflecting away from the primary issue, erecting a feel-good strawman in order to do so.
I am doing no such thing. I am discussing an issue that I would like to discuss, which I had brought up in another thread which is being ignored.
As for not having to provide care...that is absolutely wrong. A hospital is mandated to provide care for anyone that shows up. They are legally not allowed to ship non-paying individuals to different hospitals. And locally here, indigent care is given for free...the cost of which is handed on to other paying customers.
I believe my response below helps. Here it is again....
One has the option to go into the innusrance business or not. One has the option to build and operate a hospital.
If you do not want to run an insurance company that is forced to enrol one with pre-existing conditions....then do not go into the business.
Simple solution......mandate insurance companies to enrol those with pre-exisitng conditions....and mandate that premiums are set at a level to allow no more than a certain profit rate....and let the business owners decide if they want to go into or stay in the business.
Why must we mandate THE PEOPLE to do something with NO option?