If you have the means to pick up the tab for lets say a 6 months stay in intensive care at the Mayo clinic, you would certainly have enough to buy health insurance.No?
Yes, you would. But why would you be obligated to carry it. Should Warren Buffet be required to carry insurance? He can clearly absorb any risk he might incur be it medical, flood, car, or whatever. If you think he should be required to carry insurance, please provide your rationale.
As to deadbeats, there are plenty of them , everywhere, many free riders by choice, and it is your government,and you as a tax payer that pick up the tab for them .Are you happy about that?
I am not happy about free riders. I find them despicable. And I would not let them get away with non-payment of bills any more than you would. I would just approach it differently. I think requiring anyone to carry insurance is not only an infringement of liberty, it's not quite on target for solving the problem. The most direct and natural way to solve the problem is to not provide service to deadbeats. The second most direct way is to exact payment after the fact, to not let them get away with it one way or another.
(BTW, one popular approach to healthcare, socializing it, would produce more free riders than anything I've discussed. It's an open invitation to free riders.)
You trying for the dodge...you know what i meant.
Yes, I knew what you meant. But I was trying to make a point, which I'm still not sure got through. The point is that not having insurance is not the same thing as being a deadbeat. You keep equating them but they are not the same. There may be considerable correlation but the concepts are different.
Put your suchi chef in the hospital for 6 months, would he be able to pick up the tab ? Would you pay for him?
I expect that he would either not go to the hospital or he would pay the bill. He might need to make payments over a number of years. Six months in the hospital is expensive.
If they put a donation box in the restaurant, I would contribute. |
