First, if you don’t trust the government, then elect people you trust. If you can’t elect people you trust, then you’re back to the problem with the free market: you’re one person competing against organizations with numbers and funds that dwarf yours. You can’t ask for a free market and then complain when it works against you.
BTW, the idea that the government isn’t to be trusted has been used by powers who choose to undermine the only way we have to keep them in check: namely, the government. Never forget that. The government is all that stands between you and corporations making you into livestock (which we practically are already anyway, but that’s another discussion).
Second, the new system isn’t different, and anyone who said you weren’t going to kick in your share was lying to you. The “free market” is no different than anything else. “Volume” discounts mean someone is paying more, and the savvy are the ones who shop & pay less. But if everyone was savvy, prices would suck. The only difference between government controlled markets & free markets in that case is the illusion of control in your decisions. At least with a regulated market, you know if it’s a bad deal. That will certainly be hidden from you in a free market.
When you get private health insurance, the single guys get screwed on the plan so that the married folks can have kids, but you don’t see a mob of single guys complaining at the workplace demanding that the married folks stop leeching off the plan with their spouses & kids. In Illinois, it’s the same thing with schools. Something like 75% of my real estate taxes go towards schools that I will never send anyone to. But I’m not complaining, because I’d rather have the kids in school than robbing me. Funny how it works better that way.
As a rule with insurance if you’re not actively utilizing it you’re always paying for someone else. That is, in fact, what the word “insurance” means.
The new system, by including younger and healthier (but poor) folks increases the risk pool. Over time, this saves the system money.
Under the old system, said younger and healthier (but poor) folks would not get basic preventive maintenance and when they ceased to be younger and healthier would be driven to the ER with some catastrophic problem that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to fix. Under the new system, those folks are getting basic preventive medicine that will help to prevent so many catastrophic health emergencies.
Often, younger and healthier (but poor) people can’t afford basic health care for their children. Strangely enough those children can’t afford to pay for their own health care either. (I know, I know, child labor laws are the worst.) With the new system there will be fewer uninsured children and therefore fewer children growing up with preventable or treatable health problems.
Some of us have this crazy idea that, overall, the world is a better place when fewer people suffer unnecessarily. If folks can afford basic health care through subsidized insurance then they suffer less and some of us think it’s worth paying the full premiums (because, ya know, we can already afford it). If you fancy yourself a sort of John Galt then you might also reflect on how this indirectly benefits you. Fewer unhealthy people means fewer diseases spreading around that you can catch. Fewer people bankrupted by medical bills means more spending on consumer goods helps to grow the economy. Fewer people with horrible financial and health problems constantly looming over their heads means less disaffection, alienation, and rage translating into happier, more generous people who will maybe not cut you off in traffic so often. Finally, fewer desperate people quite likely leads to a decrease in crime. (“But I shouldn’t have to bribe those people not commit crimes!” But if you didn’t you’d just have to “bribe” a policeman into protecting you so it’s a bit of a wash, right? Why not just pay that little extra to make the world you live in a better place?)
Also, WTF are the Illuminati/new world order/ancient aliens going to do with this dastardly knowledge about where you buy your insurance? It’s never struck me as something I really needed to hide from the IRS.
But you’re paying for hosts of services you don’t necessarily use. The fire department. The police department. The military. Utilities. Roadways. Schools. Churches.
At the same time, others are paying for parts of your services that you do use that they do not. It’s part of society and civilization. I would rather that we all work together to pull everyone up instead of just telling them “I got mine, sorry.”
Civilization requires that we treat each other fairly. Spreading out the costs of healthcare to everyone ends up actually costing individuals less.
In a society where health insurance cost is dictated by insurance companies’ greed and where getting sick or hurt means almost certain bankruptcy, this seems to be the slightly better alternative.
In most of the civilized world, Healthcare is free and is not a Healthcare Industry in which the patient is the product/cash-cow. Defining what one is willing to pay by the “your money or your life” logic has naturally lead the U.S. to have the most expensive health services in the world.
The majority of people not having access to healthcare is an incredible advantage to employers who can offer even shitty healthcare insurance to ensure that there will always be takers for otherwise unacceptable job offers.
Shifting this balance could end an era of extreme exploitation which makes this a game with incredibly high stakes.
Going forward USians will need to provide proof of health care along with their federal tax returns to avoid paying the fine for being uninsured. It already works this way for Massachusetts state taxes. Your insurance company sends you a tax form that you include with your filing to prove that you were insured for the past year.
Don’t you realize in our current system, poor people go to the emergency room and receive treatment for free, and the hospital must pass these costs to the insurance companies, which then pass them along to you anyway?
The fact that NONE of the crazy bastards think 'using taxes to pay for some fucking hospitals is a workable solution makes my shonky British teeth hurt…
Currently when I pay my taxes I report how much I spend on health care, insurance, and my HSA in order to receive the relevant deductions. So these people are complaining that they will also have to report which insurance company they use, which the IRS could discover with an audit anyway?
Haven’t checked, but if so that has no more to do with the IRS than the Massachusetts form has to do with Massachusetts taxes. It’s like filing for any other exemption, and it’s handled that way because that’s the mechanism the government already has in place for processing lots of forms from individuals – or do you really want to spend more money to create a parallel bureaucracy AND spend the extra time and postage and so on to file this separately?
The right answer is, and always was, universal health care. But, no, the Republicans decided that this would damage their investments in the financial industries (specifically, in insurance) and insisted that we protect the buggy-whip manufacturers, so we’ve got a compromise that is less social and demands more capital. And now they’re trying to hold the economy hostage because it looks likely to be an improvement despite that handicap.
Don’t. The goddamn washer’s broken, and if the local launderette wasn’t a rather splendid non-profit charity of Extreme Cheapness and Brilliance, it would arguably be cheaper to buy new socks & boxers every bloody week…
By the way – MANY THANKS to everyone who responded to this by posting serious responses rather than being flame-baited. (Note that I’m not asserting Odin861 was driving trollies, just that it was the kind of post which has attracted flamage in the past and I’m delighted that it mostly hasn’t this time.)
