Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: grania

Your system’s fine, except you need to make a decision about those who choose not to buy insurance, then suddenly need health care but can’t afford it. Care is provided by people, and those people are entitled to be paid for their services, so you can either stick the taxpayers with the cost for it, indenture the family, or leave the guy laying in the gutter.

The last option’s a hard sell, so the most likely solution for that situation is some combination of charity and teaching hospitals, which was the foundation for Medicaid back in the day.

Maybe you could build in a low cost catastrophic policy that those who chose to go the first-aid route could buy. They’d have to get really sick to use it, but it’d keep them out of the county hospital if something really expensive happened.


40 posted on 02/24/2017 3:39:55 PM PST by ArmstedFragg (So Long Obie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]


To: ArmstedFragg

That’s what I’d envision. There would be an option of a low-cost catastrophic insurance policy. My plan would seem cruel, but in the long run first-aid and natural healing alternatives would get pretty good. With the mess we have now, it’s discouraging the search for low-cost health care solutions. How does that lead to anything that’s sustainable?


43 posted on 02/24/2017 4:34:06 PM PST by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson