You miss the point. We already pay for uninsured, we just do so in an insanely expensive way, through the ER. Someone without insurance ignores a cold or bronchitis as long as they can, and go to the ER only when it's progressed to pneumonia and he fears for his life. The $10 Z-Pack that would've taken care of it just ballooned to a week in the hospital.
That said, we're not talking about artificially keeping costs low, but aiming to actually reduce costs. In ECO101 we'd say we're attempting to move the demand curve to the left.
The other aspect that hasn't really been addressed by politicians; Health problems are often contagious. What would it do to healthcare costs when we have a tuberculosis outbreak? Again, antibiotics for a few, or potentially thousands of very sick people.
Name one area that the government has run efficienctly? Look at what they did to the post office?
The government's interference will only make things 10 times worse.
We certainly have issues regarding our health care. The government' micromanaging is like throwing gasoline on a fire. It will make it much worse.
The reason costs are as high as they are now is because of too much government interference. The best thing the government can do to help our health care system and make it more affordable is get out of the way and stop driving up costs.
Medicare and Medicaid operate at
far greater efficiency than the private insurance market. The reason they're "In trouble" is because they can't keep up with the rising costs, and people are living 20 or so years longer than they did in the past.
The poor post office just makes an easy target. It's a service, partially subsidized by customer contributions. It doesn't have to make a profit; Few government programs do. People want their mail, and people don't want the price to go up. Show me someone else who an deliver a letter from California to New Jersey in a few days for 44 cents.
You're entitled to your opinion, but I disagree. If we can get back to ECO101, the reason the prices are so high is that providers are pricing their services @ market clearing level, and due to staggering redundancies inherent in the system, and as I said before, we are all subsidizing the uninsured in a ridiculously expensive way. I think the current proposal would do wonders to reign in costs. Add a public option, even more. Single payer, more still. But hey, that's just me.
I'll agree that a hands-off approach would also reduce costs, but in order for it to work, you would have to deny care to non-payers, period.
Really? 
