The problem with this issue is that there are so many problems that it is impossible to come up with a reasonable solution. The problem has been aggravzted by the governments failure to secure the borders and the failure to prosecute people for defrauding hospitals and doctors and employers by the use of fraudulent ID and other documents.
The cost of this fraud is generally not passed on to insurance companies as they have all managed to work sweetheart deals with providers and generally get a discount of anywhere from 25% to 90% off the usual and customary bills. But the poor schmuck who goes in without insurance and has any assets at all and is honest enough to give his real name is bound to lose everything as he is not going to be able to claim any of the discounts if he can convince anyone to treat him in the first place.
Finally the emergency rooms in California (and most border states) are being used as the general practitioners for the poor and the illegal alien crowd, so if you go in for a coronary there is a possibility that your care may be delayed just enough to ensure your early departure into the hereafter.
The taxpayers are currently footing the bill for all the illegal aliens, but we don't seem willing to elect anyone who is willing to tackle that mess so we are stuck with a broken system and no viable cure. And when anyone suggests that adopting some kind of system where those who are benefiting from the illegal alien crowd (i.e., employers) pay for the cost of insuring some of these people, they get accused of being a "complete communist".
Well I've been thinking out loud on this thread. I mentioned a real life case where a young mother probably died because she postponed medical treatment because she could not afford it and was not dishonest enough to go to the emergency room and give a fake name. I suspect that happens a lot. But I have learned not to expect sympathy from this crowd.
"And when anyone suggests that adopting some kind of system where those who are benefiting from the illegal alien crowd (i.e., employers) pay for the cost of insuring some of these people, they get accused of being a "complete communist"."
Small businesses are the backbone of our economy, and they will be hit the hardest by such a requirement, and they can least afford it. They also typically don't hire illegals.
In CA, we can't elect enough people to put a halt to illegal immigration or paying for the illegals already here because of rat gerrymandering of congressional, state senatorial and assembly districts.
You haven't answered any of my posts about the case of the young woman you posed. You simply keep repeating the same claim in broad, sweeping posts to buttress your position about the need for universal coverage. I submit that your story is fictitious, and that you are, at the very least, a socialist. You certainly aren't a conservative.
What I find bewildering is the defense of employers (not necessarily here, but on other threads) who justify paying employees less than it takes to keep them alive and living indoors while trashing the employee when he needs government assistance to live indoors and stay alive. One burdens the system by not being able to, or unwilling to, pay enough to live on, and the other burdens the system by not earning enough to pay for what he needs. Yet it is the businessman who is our hero and the employee who is the bum.
I'm not a communist, but I am not a true believing free marketeer either. I am pragmatic. If we decide as a people that allowing people to die for lack of money is acceptable, then so be it, but then lets drop the concern over abortions. If we decide that allowing people to die due to lack of money is inconsistent with "the culture of life", then lets provide necessary medical care in the most cost effective way possible (you know, the way that gets the job done and respects the worth of my tax dollar).