Posted on 03/10/2017 7:04:20 PM PST by DIRTYSECRET
Don't we pay extra for those drivers who are uninsured? We may have a choice to not carry it but is it really as choice? In Calif. we DEFINITELY are required to carry liability insurance and too many don't, thereby flaunting the law. So where does it say the we all pay for health insurance for someone who enjoys shooting up?
You bring up a good point, and it reminded me of an issue which I’ve often thought about in the past.
Regarding medical insurance, people should have to pay for it. Some can’t pay, so, some kind of assistance might be offered.
HOWEVER....
And as you reminded me...
People should have to pay for their bad habits and their risky behaviors.
So, an alcoholic should have to pay for the costs incurred by him and every other alcoholic, by taxing alcoholic drinks at a level that will cause them to drink less, while at the same time helping to pay for the medical bills that he/she will incur in the future. The taxes should be held in a “kitty” for the sole purpose of paying for the bills that alcoholics incur, and for the bills that the cause other people to incur (like from accidents).
Likewise for marijuana use, and for heroin use, and for tobacco smoking, and any other illegal substance. Like I said before, those kind of habits should be taxed at a rate that makes people think twice and more about how expensive those habits have become for them. In any case, taxes collected for each of the bad habits should be held in medical accounts (expense accounts) to take care any bills that are incurred by “users” and other victims.
It would be the same for other risky behaviors, such as mountain climbing or parachuting (which I’m sure people already get insurance for those out-of-the-ordinary activities), etc.
People who are overweight are also paying for their over-eating, but they’re not paying for the health issues which accompany their “unfortunate” weight gains. So, should “regular” folks who don’t have the weight issues have to pay for those who “suffer” from obesity and other weight-related issues?
In any case, there was a time when people “paid a price” for their own bad behaviors and risky behaviors. We should be able to find a way to have people pay for their own “mistakes”, and not put the burden on those who don’t share the same bad habits or behaviors.
Mandatory automobile insurance DOUBLED the price of insurance.
Then it created a black market advantage for illegals.
BLAH BLAH BLAH People know nothing about economics. Go back to your tv set.
Since auto insurance is a boondoggle, we demand health insurance be DOUBLED and create a black market eg emergency room.
Your ignorance on display. The slippery slide to govt destruction.
Did you know not one nation south of the US is not a pile of trash? Ignorance is bringing that here.
Alcohol & tobacco taxes hurt victims. It does not discourage behavior, it hides & substitutes worse behavior.
Taxation destroys, get used to it. The only question is how.
How do you know who is and who isn’t an alcoholic so you know who to tax more ? does an alcoholic get an ID card ?
how does that work ?
remember the tobacco industry finally lost in court and
states shared a bazillion dollars
https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0365.pdf
The hype at the time was, the states were going to set aside the money to help pay for smoking cessation programs and programs to prevent\reduce tobacco use.
Money mostly went into general revenues to be used as the legislature sees fit.
Let me know when the tax people come for whatever floats your boat
Are you serious?
Do you really think “sin taxes” would be used for the medical bills of the “sinners”?
.
And I would say, as would many of our founders, that a law requiring you to buy anything, however wise, is not necessarily constitutional.
Note auto insurance companies can offer policies tailored to fit the needs of individual motorists and can even refuse to cover very high risk drivers and even insure certain costly to repair vehicles. However if car insurance were regulated like Obamacare, consumers would only be able to buy one government approved policy that covered cars, trucks, SUVs, sports cars, motor homes and motorcycles and all drivers regardless of their driving record would have to be insured. This would mean good drivers would be subsiding the cost of insuring high risk drivers through higher premiums and consumers would be forced to buy more expensive coverage for vehicles they do not even own.
Feels similar though when one first hears the notion - and the auto insurers are gouging the hell out of us - along with homeowners insurance: Our two vehicles are worth about a third of what out home is and they cost more to insure each year.
Twisted.
Taxation destroys. Therefore more taxation is better.
Not!
Does not follow. That is the powerful desire for a free lunch.
Many alcoholics get better NOT by medicine or AA, but because they eventually grow out of the disease.
Victims of alcoholics can simply work, buy insurance to protect themselves.
Taxing cigarettes and alcohol destroys people, but makes do-gooders like yourself feel good about it. It robs help from victims, and makes you feel good about hurting others.
And that hurts children. I can never understand how folks can want to hurt children.
Really big difference between your Auto Insurance and Zero-don’t-Care...State versus Federal.
There is NO Constitutional authority for FedGov to be in the Health Insurance business, just as there is NO authority for them to be in AUTO Insurance business, or any other insurance business, for that matter.
Health Insurance should be a State issue, not Federal.
Forget the fact that this whole debacle started out as a debate about Health CARE, and then devolved into a mudpit fight over Health INSURANCE.
homobamacare is a tax on existence. Please don't insult everyone's intelligence by comparing the two.
It goes much deeper. Many years ago as an orderly in a hospital I watched a 16 year old girl die from renal failure. I never forgot what her doctor told me. He said it was too bad because next year we would have renal dialysis and she would have been saved. Her bad luck.
The down side is that it would cost $25,000 per year per patient. The Judiciary and Congress had a problem. They couldn’t claim health care was a right but they did not want to deal with the problem of only those who could afford renal dialysis to get it. So they punted. They decided gummint would pay without explicitly stating any logical underpinning.
Every time in the last 50 years that the gummint has had a chance to definitively say that health care is a right or not they have sloughed the issue. So in essence, they have, by default, accepted that health care is a right without explicitly saying so. By legally demanding no one be turned away fro the ER. By every decision that deals with health care. Without saying so they have said so.
I dont know if Trump will be able tp pry Obamacare out of the tight fisted federal grip. Everyone is already not talking about the specter of its unconstitutionality and are off in the weeds on the devilish details.
Spend all your money on “health insurance coverage” to meet the federal requirements and die in your bathtub because you know your actual cost of the “health care” you need cant be afforded by you or your entire family.
Being on VA/single payer for the last 30 years, I cant fathom why any free person would settle for government mandated health insurance or medical care.
Auto insurance forced on everyone is just wrong too.
Like someone said, it did NOT lower the cost of Auto Insurance - as was not only promoted - but PROMISED if it was mandated.
Also, if you need to use your Auto-insurance much, you are priced out of it or kicked off of it. So don’t tell me how we all must pay for everyone else or how great mandated insurance is. Just these two examples above says a lot. Not to mention we should never be mandated to buy anything.
It is a total rouse to say everyone must pay anyway. Everyone pays for ‘stolen’ good from a store but everyone isn’t forced to purchase goods from a store. Sure the price of those goods reflect the amount of ‘loss’ carried over. But you are not forced to purchase items from that store either. There are other stores to shop from.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.