Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Then you are not okay with government enforcing car insurance?
On people who drive?
Yes....but driving is a voluntary activity that poses a risk to others. And the government only mandates liability insurance (which protects others). Not comp and collision (which protects the car, the lien holder and the driver).
Not really apples to apples, especially when you consider that people who don't drive don't have to buy car insurance.
Now here's an interesting counter question:
Would you be ok with making non drivers buy car insurance to lower the cost for everyone else ? (and the potential liability they pose to drivers as pedestrians) After all, many of them might be car owner/drivers someday....so the argument could be made that just because they don't need it now, doesn't mean that they never will.
No?
Well, that's kind of what forcing young, healthy people to buy health insurance does.
EXACTLY! Ain't going to happen on the first go-round and probably not on the 4th either. Hopefully this plan takes a bit longer than the last piece of crap that was dumped on us, maybe with more eyeballs on it and knowing what mistakes were made before this time it'll be better?
On thing is for certain, it's going to be interesting to see what happens with Obamacare while all this gets worked out since I don't believe it will be repealed without something to replace it with.
If there's nothing in place by next year it's going to get very interesting to see what prices jump to and what insurers are still willing to hold policies, if ANY at all...
They have to file their plans for next year in April of this year. That's probably why the GOP are rushing to approve something, so the market is stabilized. So.... yeah that will be interesting.
House Speaker Paul D. Ryan’s proposal to revise the Affordable Care Act would lower the number of Americans with health insurance by 24 million while reducing the federal deficit by $337 billion by 2026, congressional budget analysts said Monday.
According to a Congressional Budget Office projection, 14 million fewer people would have health insurance next year alone. Premiums would be 15 percent to 20 percent higher in the first year compared with the Affordable Care Act and 10 percent lower on average after 2026. By and large, older Americans would pay “substantially” more and younger Americans less, the report said.
If I recall, Ryan did not want this to go through the CBO in the first place while aggressively demanding the ACA go through. And lo and be-****ing-hold, the CBO viewed the ACA more favorably the the AHCA. Who could have guessed. At the very least, Ryan's squirming every time someone asked about things like this could have given it away.
Paul Ryan is a spineless *****.
PS
I for sure remember the GOP saying the ACA was 'pushed through.' That took the Obama administration a year to get hammered down. Trump's plan took weeks. So... is being pushed through good or bad (I ask knowing that Paul Ryan is a man void of principle).
Yes....but driving is a voluntary activity that poses a risk to others. And the government only mandates liability insurance (which protects others). Not comp and collision (which protects the car, the lien holder and the driver).
Not really apples to apples, especially when you consider that people who don't drive don't have to buy car insurance.
Now here's an interesting counter question:
Would you be ok with making non drivers buy car insurance to lower the cost for everyone else ? (and the potential liability they pose to drivers as pedestrians) After all, many of them might be car owner/drivers someday....so the argument could be made that just because they don't need it now, doesn't mean that they never will.
No?
Well, that's kind of what forcing young, healthy people to buy health insurance does.
Except in regards to health most will at sometime need extensive health care. When they can't pay those cost ultimately get passed onto those with insurance. One reason hospital charges are what they are is to make up for uncollectibles debts.
I never liked the ACA..just because I thought that the Mandate gave the insurance companies free rein....My idea is this..everyone cancel their health insurance--everyone! I think that would bring premiums down in a hurry. No premiums, no claims..no claims..no pay for Doctors, nurses and hospitals.
Yes....but driving is a voluntary activity that poses a risk to others. And the government only mandates liability insurance (which protects others). Not comp and collision (which protects the car, the lien holder and the driver).
Not really apples to apples, especially when you consider that people who don't drive don't have to buy car insurance.
Now here's an interesting counter question:
Would you be ok with making non drivers buy car insurance to lower the cost for everyone else ? (and the potential liability they pose to drivers as pedestrians) After all, many of them might be car owner/drivers someday....so the argument could be made that just because they don't need it now, doesn't mean that they never will.
No?
Well, that's kind of what forcing young, healthy people to buy health insurance does.
Please just stop with the automobile versus health insurance comparisons.
Obviously if you do not own or *DRIVE* an automobile then you aren't in that market and have no reason to purchase coverage nor should be compelled to do so.
OTOH unless you are some sort of alien, vampire or other non-human creature everyone in the United States has a body. If you have a human body it is susceptible to illness, disease or other conditions requiring medical attention. This can range from preventive medicine to treatment of disease/health issues.
From teens through young adulthood the "young" are very physically active; as they should be. So what happens when a twenty-something becomes injured while skiing, roller blading, biking, playing sports, or whatever?
The young also have poorly formed sense of judgment. This often leads to high levels of drinking and doing things like driving an automobile or as has happened (sadly) far too often recently in my area falling down onto train (subway) tracks.
Have not even touched upon the young who are diagnosed (or remain undiagnosed) with a host of diseases such as cancer, diabetes, and so forth.
I never liked the ACA..just because I thought that the Mandate gave the insurance companies free rein....My idea is this..everyone cancel their health insurance--everyone! I think that would bring premiums down in a hurry. No premiums, no claims..no claims..no pay for Doctors, nurses and hospitals.
Use the market to our advantage...
Yeah... that wouldn't work. Too many people presently rely on insurance. As in they're actively paying medical bills. And when we factor in how incredibly unlikely it would be to get a large number of people to willingly get on board with this, the result of a sizable movement pulling out of healthcare would just increase premiums, making poor people's lives worse. That's why the mandate existed. It kept costs down.
[Please just stop with the automobile versus health insurance comparisons.
Obviously if you do not own or *DRIVE* an automobile then you aren't in that market and have no reason to purchase coverage nor should be compelled to do so.
OTOH unless you are some sort of alien, vampire or other non-human creature everyone in the United States has a body. If you have a human body it is susceptible to illness, disease or other conditions requiring medical attention. This can range from preventive medicine to treatment of disease/health issues.
From teens through young adulthood the "young" are very physically active; as they should be. So what happens when a twenty-something becomes injured while skiing, roller blading, biking, playing sports, or whatever?
The young also have poorly formed sense of judgment. This often leads to high levels of drinking and doing things like driving an automobile or as has happened (sadly) far too often recently in my area falling down onto train (subway) tracks.
Have not even touched upon the young who are diagnosed (or remain undiagnosed) with a host of diseases such as cancer, diabetes, and so forth.
Except in regards to health most will at sometime need extensive health care. When they can't pay those cost ultimately get passed onto those with insurance. One reason hospital charges are what they are is to make up for uncollectibles debts.
So why is it ok to mandate health coverage when your healthy but not to mandate car insurance if you don't drive?
After all, you MIGHT own a car someday, and your paying before you own one lowers the cost for everyone else.
How about mandating homeowners insurance on renters because they will probably buy a house some day?
(This is the same argument those who advocate mandated health insurance are using. )
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
From a different angle...
