You can fool some of the people all of the time, you can even fool all of the people some of the time, but you can always fool all of the fools all of the time.
-- Jeff MacNelly, "Shoe" --
------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Jeff MacNelly, "Shoe" --
------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess I don't understand what the problem is with the health act's requiring people to have health insurance. Not sure how it can be "unconstitutional". If the Supreme Court decides it's unconstitutional, then please explain to me how the states have the authority to require that I register my vehicles, and that I must have automobile insurance to drive them.
Yeah, it's a good thing, but so is health insurance. Being a good thing is not necessarily enough to make it constitutional. How can requiring health insurance be less constitutional than requiring contribution to social security? Or selective service ("the draft")? Or a load of other stuff?
I don't understand.
---------------------------------
Daughter, Nugget, and I went for a walk yesterday and we passed several houses down by the water that had signs in the window stating that the premises had been winterized, and listing the dangers posed by antifreeze in the water pipes. Summer homes, I guess. Daughter says the signs are legally required, and must be visible from the street.
Huh? The township is worried that trespassers, thieves, and vandals might be poisoned?
I don't get it.
Nothin' like advertising to casual passersby that the house is empty and unlikely to be checked on before spring. "Break in here! Have a party! Redecorate the walls! Compliments of the township!"
.
2 comments:
I don't understand how or why the government can require people to have health insurance. Car insurance? Sure. Car insurance is for when you damage yours or someone else's car. But health insurance is only for yourself. No other person's being harmed. I don't understand how it can be legal to require it. It's a bunch of malarkey to me. I call shenanigans on it.
Now, I have health insurance. But if I didn't, and couldn't afford to get it, how could they require me to do so? And how could they fine me if I didn't have health insurance because I couldn't afford it? Free health insurance from the state has income limits. A single person working full time for minimum wage ($7.25/hour) makes too much money to qualify for free state health insurance, but not enough to buy health insurance for themself. How does the government think this is going to play out?
Obviously, if you have money, you can buy health insurance. It costs about $500/month for a single person. Upwards of almost $1000/month for a family. With no insurance, I wouldn't spend that much on medical care for myself and my family in a year, nevermind a month.
Again, I don't understand how it can be legal to require people to have health insurance and WHY. I hope it does get challenged in court and found to be unconstitutional. The government has more important things to be doing than fining people for not having health insurance. This is a terrible invasion into personal sovereignty.
The "why" is because when you don't have insurance but show up at an emergency room with a life-threatening condition, a tax-supported community hospital is legally and morally required to treat you. So MY taxes pay for your medical care. And without insurance, you are more likely to let it go to the "very expensive treatment" level before seeking care.
With insurance, I don't have to pay for your illness, and your illness is more likely to be headed off before it gets critical, thus lowering medical costs overall and reducing pressure on the system.
In theory, even the poorest would be able to get GROUP insurance through the government if they can't afford private insurance. Taxes would be diverted from paying for critical care for people without insurance, and instead would go toward subsidizing that group insurance and preventive care.
Post a Comment