I didn't say "your asking for a handout", I said "IF your asking for xxxx than your asking for a handout", and I didn't really mean it in a personal sense, if your asking it for other people than your asking for them to get a handout, if your asking for it as a general rule, than your asking for the general rule be that these types of handouts be given. Maybe they should be, I'm not dismissing the idea, or saying no solution should be provided. I'm just pointing out what the solution would entail. Having healthier people assume some of the cost for less healthy people is having them pay for the handout, even if its the morally right, and practically sensible thing to do. Giving this handout might prevent suffering, might keep people from suboptimal and expensive care at emergency rooms, might in other words possibly be a net good thing, but its still a handout. "Handout" doesn't imply "I am against it", or "We shouldn't do it".
I was asking you what kind of solution you thought society should offer for this kind of situation. "None," would be a perfectly reasonable response
I gave a response with one possibility (without explicitly either endorsing the idea, or rejecting it, just implying that it was better than the 2000 page bills that almost went in to law). Subsidized (in other words containing a handout) catastrophic insurance.
---
"If we're going to have an subsidized insurance scheme that everyone can join, I think it would be best if its catastrophic insurance. Not gold plated, cover everything, medical pre-payment plans, but insurance against the most serious of risks. Those are the risks that can crush people. We don't need to "insure" against an annual checkup, esp. if your talking about subsidized insurance. "
Message 26293633 |
