Fines Proposed for Going Without Health Insurance

You get fine and your license revoked if you don't have insurance on your car. Why? Because the cost of uninsured drivers poses a financial liability to the rest of socieity. As long as society is forced to absorb the costs of uninsured patients by escalating medical costs the principle is the same.
 
darkdog said:
This isn't about insuring the uninsured. This is about concentrating more power in Washington and if you don't go along, they will call you liars, political terrorists, evil-mongers, and yes, racists. If they're this nice while trying to acquire power, imagine how nice they'll be when they have it.
Click to expand...

Proposed health care changes are very much about insuring the uninsured, reducing cost, and making health care accessible to all.

The rest of your post can be attributed to the Republican dissidents, the Tea Baggers, and the far right Libertarians.
 
jillio said:
You get fine and your license revoked if you don't have insurance on your car. Why? Because the cost of uninsured drivers poses a financial liability to the rest of socieity. As long as society is forced to absorb the costs of uninsured patients by escalating medical costs the principle is the same.
Click to expand...

In our state, your license will suspended until you add insurance on auto, not revoke.

I don't see compare the auto insurance with health insurance because they are totally different because crash on other car will be your liable responsible but if you get very sick so nothing but just yourself, except for contagious disease and I think people with contagious disease should stay in home instead of spread on other people, such as flu.

I'm against on mandatory health insurance to everyone due more libertarian views because it does harm to liberty in my opinion and some Americans don't want be insured for personal reason, such as rich people are rather to spend money on expensive health care because they could afford without need for insurance.

If government-run health care, aka Obamacare haven't pass as mandatory health insurance passes so it could hurt employees who work at minimum wage or less than $20 per hours with very high cost of insurance.

I'm really doubt that Obamacare will pass because not enough senate vote to reach 60 so blue dog democrats are oppose as well.
 
It's in the guise to distribute wealth at the point of a gun, euphemistically so. This isn't about choice but government intervention and bullying. And you're right, the auto insurance requirement is designed to help protect the insured drivers and others from liabilities and medical expenses where it may involve several individuals. Comparing auto insurance requirement for a driver to a health insurance mandate for each one person is comparing apples to oranges.
 
Foxrac said:
In our state, your license will suspended until you add insurance on auto, not revoke.

I don't see compare the auto insurance with health insurance because they are totally different because crash on other car will be your liable responsible but if you get very sick so nothing but just yourself, except for contagious disease and I think people with contagious disease should stay in home instead of spread on other people, such as flu.

I'm against on mandatory health insurance to everyone due more libertarian views because it does harm to liberty in my opinion and some Americans don't want be insured for personal reason, such as rich people are rather to spend money on expensive health care because they could afford without need for insurance.

If government-run health care, aka Obamacare haven't pass as mandatory health insurance passes so it could hurt employees who work at minimum wage or less than $20 per hours with very high cost of insurance.

I'm really doubt that Obamacare will pass because not enough senate vote to reach 60 so blue dog democrats are oppose as well.
Click to expand...

Suspended or revoked...and a hefty fine to go with it. Some people don't want to carry auto insurance, either. But, if they don't, then they have to pay the penalties when caught without it.

The situations can be different, but the fact of the matter is, mandatory auto insurance became law to reduce the costs to the rest of society that go up when there are uninsured drivers on the road. The same principle applies to health care. As long as there are uninsured people that the rest of society has to pick up the costs for, medical costs will continue to skyrocket.
 
kokonut said:
It's in the guise to distribute wealth at the point of a gun, euphemistically so. This isn't about choice but government intervention and bullying. And you're right, the auto insurance requirement is designed to help protect the insured drivers and others from liabilities and medical expenses where it may involve several individuals. Comparing auto insurance requirement for a driver to a health insurance mandate for each one person is comparing apples to oranges.
Click to expand...

Auto insurance also covers passengers which may or may not be drivers, or even of the age to drive.

It most certainly is about choice. The choice to have medical care accessable to all in this country.

Uninsured drivers equals higher costs for insured drivers. Uninsured patients equals higher costs for insured patients.
 
Foxrac, they will find a way around the 60-vote ("find a rule around a rule" - Kennedy's famous M.O.) by using the "reconciliation rule" which requires only a 51 majority vote (Senate) or better to ultimately pass the bill.
 
jillio said:
Auto insurance also covers passengers which may or may not be drivers, or even of the age to drive.

It most certainly is about choice. The choice to have medical care accessable to all in this country.

Uninsured drivers equals higher costs for insured drivers. Uninsured patients equals higher costs for insured patients.
Click to expand...

I already said that about auto insurance - "...insurance requirement is designed to help protect the insured drivers and others from liabilities and medical expenses."

Again, comparing apples to oranges here when it comes to the wholesale mandate rquirement for each and every living legal adults.

As always, they find any excuse and means to tax people, even if it means disguising it as a "fine." We know better.
 
kokonut said:
Foxrac, they will find a way around the 60-vote ("find a rule around a rule" - Kennedy's famous M.O.) by using the "reconciliation rule" which requires only a 51 majority vote (Senate) or better to ultimately pass the bill.
Click to expand...

I believe that health care reform, such as Obamacare require 60 votes to pass in senate.
 
kokonut said:
.... Comparing auto insurance requirement for a driver to a health insurance mandate for each one person is comparing apples to oranges.
Click to expand...
You're right. The law requires auto insurance for liability coverage. Health care insurance is not the same thing.
 
So...it is more important that mandatory coverage on automobiles be in effect that mandatory health care coverage? More important to be able to fix your car, or a car you hit, than to provide health care coverage for your children and yourself? Nice one.
 
kokonut said:
I already said that about auto insurance - "...insurance requirement is designed to help protect the insured drivers and others from liabilities and medical expenses."

Again, comparing apples to oranges here when it comes to the wholesale mandate rquirement for each and every living legal adults.

As always, they find any excuse and means to tax people, even if it means disguising it as a "fine." We know better.
Click to expand...

Reba said:
You're right. The law requires auto insurance for liability coverage. Health care insurance is not the same thing.
Click to expand...

Agreed, have mandatory health insurance isn't great idea.
 
Foxrac said:
Agreed, have mandatory health insurance isn't great idea.
Click to expand...

Then don't look for health care costs to go down anytime soon, and get used to paying for the health care costs of the uninsured.
 
Rising health care costs have always gone up every year.

One of the reason for rising health care costs is from expensive malpractice lawsuits.
Which is why tort reform is so important. The lawyers are a part of this blame on rising health care costs by abusing the system. Not only that the govt is seen as part of the problem, too. That is Medicare, Medicaid, etc. when you have a $60 to $80 billion dollar a year Medicare fraud to deal with. And you want to put your trust into a govt run health insurance plan?? Mon dieu!

The excessive costs of our current medical system can be classified into three major categories:

• The first, and by far the largest excess cost, is due to the current overuse of medical resources by patients. Overuse is the rational response of consumers who do not have to pay the entire cost of the medical services they use. The causes of those excess costs are Medicaid, Medicare, and tax laws that provide incentives for individuals to have their employers purchase their medical care in the form of private health insurance.

• The second category of excess cost consists of administrative and paperwork costs that are unnecessary for the provision of health care, but that have come into existence because of the current patchwork of third-party payers and their attempts to control their increasing costs by closely monitoring the behavior of doctors and patients. Even worse is the fact that those cost-containment activities do not seem to have contained costs very well.

• The third excess cost is associated with the fear of malpractice suits. Administering medically unnecessary tests and procedures helps to insulate doctors and hospitals from the potential wrath of patients or their families when inevitable accidents occur in medical treatment or when treatments just do not work.
Click to expand...

Why Health Care Costs Too Much
 
Then please explain why the states that have enacted tort reform and placed caps on medical malpractice suits have not seen a reduction in health care costs?
 
mandatory automobile insurance. good. a very good idea because automobile accident affects all parties involved and the victims should not be paying for their own injuries caused by others.

mandatory health insurance. bad.... a very bad idea because this is people's own problem which affect nobody else and I should not be paying for people's problem. I'm all for paying tax for medicare/medicaid but for health insurance? :nono:

Affordable health care is the solution, not mandatory health insurance.
 
Jiro said:
mandatory automobile insurance. good. a very good idea because automobile accident affects all parties involved.

mandatory health insurance. bad.... a very bad idea because this is people's own problem which affect nobody else and I should not be paying for people's problem. I'm all for paying tax for medicare/medicaid but for health insurance? :nono:

Affordable health care is the solution, not mandatory health insurance.
Click to expand...

Actually, the medically uninsured do affect everyone else by causing costs to escalate. When a cancer patient who is uninsured runs up $200,000 in medical care costs, who do you think pays for them? I can guarantee you that the hospital, the doctors, and the medical suppliers don't write that off. We all pay for it in excalating medical costs.

Medicare and Medicaid are health insurance.
 
Back
Top