Compulsory Health Insurance

[manifold]

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)?

 

[Old Rocks]

I suppose the primary differance is that the IRS has far more experiance in enforcing the collection of the money than any new agency would.

 

[The Rabbi]

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)?

Taxes are an arrangement between government and the citizen. The mandate is between a private company and a citizen. Government can compel paying taxes but they cannot compel you to buy something. In any case, taxes are due for a service where apportioning benefit would be difficult. Like roads or defense. Where the benefit is direct, like health insurance, gov't has no business imposing a tax.

 

[nodoginnafight]

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)?

You make some very good points. I'd just like to add that I don't have any problem at all with government encroaching upon someone's "liberty" to dip into my wallet to pay for their medical expenses.

IMHO - No one has the "liberty" to demand that I pick up 100% of the tab for THEIR healthcare expenses. If they can afford to contribute to their own care - they should.

 

[toomuchtime_]

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)?

You present a false dichotomy. We do not have and no one has proposed a tax to pay for health insurance as an alternative to the individual mandate. The burden of the individual mandate will fall on Americans who are voluntarily uninsured, various estimated as between 17 million and 20 million, who could afford to buy health insurance but choose not to, who, under current law are responsible for their own medical expenses except in those few cases in which they spend themselves into poverty and qualify for Medicaid; the tax burden for these few is tiny.

Without the individual mandate, the cost of the proposed insurance reforms other than the subsidies, insuring people with pre existing conditions at standard rates, a disability waiver of premium and a cap on out of pocket expenses, would impose such higher costs on insurers that premiums would rise by as much as 30%. The intent of the individual mandate to try to shift the entire cost of these reforms on to these 17 million to 20 million people who choose to be responsible for their own medical expenses. It is, in effect, a tax on the exercise of personal freedom.

An alternative that has been proposed by many, mostly Republicans, is a sliding scale subsidy to help those with pre existing conditions to pay the higher premiums for high risk health insurance, and a mechanism for cost sharing with the states for such a purpose in included in the recent Republican counter proposal to HR 3962, and of course, this was McCain's proposal during the recent election. Under this proposal, only those who needed help to pay for the higher premiums of high risk insurance who receive financial aid, so the cost of paying for the reforms would be less and the benefits more progressively distributed, and since this cost would be spread over the entire population, the subsidies coming from the general fund, the per capita cost would be tiny compared to the thousands of dollars a year the individual mandate would require the voluntarily uninsured to pay.

Clearly, on this point, it is the Republicans who have come up with the more progressive proposal and the Congressional Dems who are on the dark side of history.

 

[Oldandtired]

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.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

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)?

The massive (Kucinich estimated 70 Billion) amount of new revenue the private insurance companies will get from this has the smell of a back-door bailout. However, if you believe their intentions are good, it's merely another unintended consequence of a half-baked plan.

Either way, it's really really stupid and it's the young who will suffer.... folks 18-29 who would normally never buy health insurance since they don't really need it are the victims here.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Ok, here's some laws for you..... how about a law that:

1. You pay for your own housing.
2. You pay for your own food.
3. You support your children.
4. You don't have children you can't afford... repeatedly.
5. You pay for your own education.

I mean, as long as we're mandating that we take care of ourselves and not burdon others such as seems to be the argument for "mandatory" health insurance...

 

[Oldandtired]

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)?

The massive (Kucinich estimated 70 Billion) amount of new revenue the private insurance companies will get from this has the smell of a back-door bailout. However, if you believe their intentions are good, it's merely another unintended consequence of a half-baked plan.

Either way, it's really really stupid and it's the young who will suffer.... folks 18-29 who would normally never buy health insurance since they don't really need it are the victims here.

No...we are ALL vicrtims....For the first time government will be able to mandate you buy soimething every year for the length of your life.

It is setting a precedent that contradicts the whole idea of our republic to begin with.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

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)?

The massive (Kucinich estimated 70 Billion) amount of new revenue the private insurance companies will get from this has the smell of a back-door bailout. However, if you believe their intentions are good, it's merely another unintended consequence of a half-baked plan.

Either way, it's really really stupid and it's the young who will suffer.... folks 18-29 who would normally never buy health insurance since they don't really need it are the victims here.

No...we are ALL vicrtims....For the first time government will be able to mandate you buy soimething every year for the length of your life.

It is setting a precedent that contradicts the whole idea of our republic to begin with.

You realize of course, that the "model" for this is compulsory auto insurance. Never mind that you don't need to buy auto insurance if you don't own an auto...

 

[Oldandtired]

The massive (Kucinich estimated 70 Billion) amount of new revenue the private insurance companies will get from this has the smell of a back-door bailout. However, if you believe their intentions are good, it's merely another unintended consequence of a half-baked plan.

Either way, it's really really stupid and it's the young who will suffer.... folks 18-29 who would normally never buy health insurance since they don't really need it are the victims here.

No...we are ALL vicrtims....For the first time government will be able to mandate you buy soimething every year for the length of your life.

It is setting a precedent that contradicts the whole idea of our republic to begin with.

You realize of course, that the "model" for this is compulsory auto insurance. Never mind that you don't need to buy auto insurance if you don't own an auto...

Thats the point. You opt to buy an auto...and thereofre you are mandated to buy auto insurance.....but the point is it is all based on the original option to buy an auto....

There is ABSOLUTELY no comparison.....your parents OPTED to have a child....but you yourself did not opt to be conceived......

This is a very slippery slope we are heading towards.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

No...we are ALL vicrtims....For the first time government will be able to mandate you buy soimething every year for the length of your life.

It is setting a precedent that contradicts the whole idea of our republic to begin with.

You realize of course, that the "model" for this is compulsory auto insurance. Never mind that you don't need to buy auto insurance if you don't own an auto...

Thats the point. You opt to buy an auto...and thereofre you are mandated to buy auto insurance.....but the point is it is all based on the original option to buy an auto....

There is ABSOLUTELY no comparison.....your parents OPTED to have a child....but you yourself did not opt to be conceived......

This is a very slippery slope we are heading towards.

But that's precisely the "precedent" they are citing.

Never mind that it's not valid, since when did they ever have valid arguments or comparisons?

 

[Oldandtired]

You realize of course, that the "model" for this is compulsory auto insurance. Never mind that you don't need to buy auto insurance if you don't own an auto...

Thats the point. You opt to buy an auto...and thereofre you are mandated to buy auto insurance.....but the point is it is all based on the original option to buy an auto....

There is ABSOLUTELY no comparison.....your parents OPTED to have a child....but you yourself did not opt to be conceived......

This is a very slippery slope we are heading towards.

But that's precisely the "precedent" they are citing.

Never mind that it's not valid, since when did they ever have valid arguments or comparisons?

I must question ANYONE who is gullible enough to see auto insurance as an identical...or even similar model to the healthcare mandate.

One is based on options and the other is based on no option at all.

Apples and oranges.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Thats the point. You opt to buy an auto...and thereofre you are mandated to buy auto insurance.....but the point is it is all based on the original option to buy an auto....

There is ABSOLUTELY no comparison.....your parents OPTED to have a child....but you yourself did not opt to be conceived......

This is a very slippery slope we are heading towards.

But that's precisely the "precedent" they are citing.

Never mind that it's not valid, since when did they ever have valid arguments or comparisons?

I must question ANYONE who is gullible enough to see auto insurance as an identical...or even similar model to the healthcare mandate.

One is based on options and the other is based on no option at all.

Apples and oranges.

I couldn't agree more.

I am merely pointing out the argument they are using.

 

[manifold]

The massive (Kucinich estimated 70 Billion) amount of new revenue the private insurance companies will get from this has the smell of a back-door bailout. However, if you believe their intentions are good, it's merely another unintended consequence of a half-baked plan.

Either way, it's really really stupid and it's the young who will suffer.... folks 18-29 who would normally never buy health insurance since they don't really need it are the victims here.

No...we are ALL vicrtims....For the first time government will be able to mandate you buy soimething every year for the length of your life.

It is setting a precedent that contradicts the whole idea of our republic to begin with.

You realize of course, that the "model" for this is compulsory auto insurance. Never mind that you don't need to buy auto insurance if you don't own an auto...

You mean like you wouldn't need to buy health insurance if you don't want to be a US resident? As long as we're quibbling over unrealistic choices, isn't that a "choice" too?

 

[Oddball]

You mean like you wouldn't need to buy health insurance if you don't want to be a US resident? As long as we're quibbling over unrealistic choices, isn't that a "choice" too?

You mean you chose to be born?

Interesting take.

 

[manifold]

And an even more interesting read.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

No...we are ALL vicrtims....For the first time government will be able to mandate you buy soimething every year for the length of your life.

It is setting a precedent that contradicts the whole idea of our republic to begin with.

You realize of course, that the "model" for this is compulsory auto insurance. Never mind that you don't need to buy auto insurance if you don't own an auto...

You mean like you wouldn't need to buy health insurance if you don't want to be a US resident?

You would still be a resident. You would merely have a new address.

 

[Oldandtired]

No...we are ALL vicrtims....For the first time government will be able to mandate you buy soimething every year for the length of your life.

It is setting a precedent that contradicts the whole idea of our republic to begin with.

You realize of course, that the "model" for this is compulsory auto insurance. Never mind that you don't need to buy auto insurance if you don't own an auto...

You mean like you wouldn't need to buy health insurance if you don't want to be a US resident? As long as we're quibbling over unrealistic choices, isn't that a "choice" too?

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

 

[LibocalypseNow]

All politicians should unanimously vote this Socialist Nightmare down. This so-called Health Care Reform Bill doesn't reform anything. It actually makes things much much worse instead. Our politicians should always work to expand our Freedoms & Liberties,not take more of them away. Surely we can have real Health Care reform without taking Citizens' rights away. The coming Senate vote should be a unanimous Nay vote if our politicians still care about our Constitution and its Citizens.