[Finny]

Mandatory health insurance cannot be compared to car insurance! You have car insurance because you drive. What, you have to have health insurance because you live?

I find the whole concept absurd and invasive and unconstitutional.

[plain talk]

Mandatory health insurance cannot be compared to car insurance! You have car insurance because you drive. What, you have to have health insurance because you live?

Not because you live but because you break and you are a liability to others when you break and are carried into the emergency room. Not because you drive but because you are a liability to others if you get into an accident.

There are differences and one can quibble about them but in a liberal state such as Massachusetts his approach was indeed more rational than a Ed Kennedy state paid health care approach.

[slowhandluke]

Mandatory health insurance cannot be compared to car insurance! I agree.

You have liability insurance on your car to protect the other drivers on the road, and maybe collision insurance to protect the lien holder on your car.

You might be forced in some states to have medical insurance on yourself in your car policy.

You have health insurance to protect yourself. Nobody else is hurt if you don't have health insurance. It's a risk to your self you should be allowed to take.

Forcing medical insurance is just the statist way of covering their conscience cheaply. I can't count the folks who say that without it other folks would be forced to pay for your care. They tend to get real mad when I point out that in no other place do they expect charitable impulses to be repaid.