Now don't get me wrong, I love Massachusetts. The five years I spent in Boston were some of the finest I've had. However, Governor Duval Patrick's health insurance policy, forcing everyone to be insured and fining them for not being insured, is just weird to me. While the state has made health insurance readily available to pretty much everyone, it still just doesn't seem to make sense, and is another reason why I can't help but ask this great state, "Are you moving forwards, backwards, or just standing still?" Universal healthcare does not mean, in my opinion (which is what this blog is all about, after all) forcing residents to get health insurance and then fining them on for not having it. Isn't this a free country? Isn't it my right to be uninsured if I am stupid, lazy or just unfortunate enough not to be? How dare the government charge us for our lifestyles, as much as they may not agree with them!
Then again, I may just be bitter since I did break my ankle while being uninsured.
1 comment:
I'm not sure if requiring coverage is the right approach, but
I think there are at least two good reasons for it. First, insurance is
all about spreading risk. It only works when you have a diverse pool of
participants, some who will need more benefits than others. If you take
out all the young, healthy people, it starts to become way too
expensive. Second, and even more importantly, uninsured people are not
really outside the system, though they think they are. In fact, they
often just pass on the costs of their care to the rest of us.
If an uninsured person gets hit by a car, s/he will be taken by
ambulance or helicopter to a hospital, at taxpayer expense if s/he can't
pay the bill. S/he will get treatment at the hospital, and if the
hospital can't collect in cash, the hospital will spread that cost to
other patients who pay either with insurance or cash (or for a public
hospital, get taxpayer dollars to cover it). In many lower income
areas, uninsured folks (many who can't afford current insurance options)
often use emergency rooms for routine care, which is really expensive
and likewise passed on to other patients and/or taxpayers. The
uninsured person just got a free ride, which is particularly troubling
where the person could have had insurance but simply chose not to
because s/he felt lucky and/or health, or both.
Now, I suppose we could just let everyone sign a waiver that if they hit
by a car, they will either carry enough cash in their pocket to pay
upfront for the helicopter ride and hospital treatment or we'll just
leave them there in the street. Problem is, as a society, I don't think
we're willing to (or should) do that.
So, if we can design a system that makes insurance affordable for
everyone (including making it essentially free where required), we'll
especially need to keep costs under control and bring everyone into the
system. Anyway, I think that's the argument for the mandatory
insurance, which we already have in most if not all states when it comes
to car insurance.
Post a Comment