Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

So, why is auto insurance mandatory?

I am reading about the Republican attempt to remove health insurance from as many poor people as possible.  Even I believe I would take the chance and pay the 30% surcharge if I had to get insurance. Assuming I was young and healthy, of course. 

 

Still, the big argument against Obamacare was the requirement to have health insurance. So, would conservatives suggest we make auto insurance optional?

Honored Social Butterfly

And then, of course, we have the cost of our healthcare system in relation to the rest of the world.

 

US_spends_much_more_on_health_than_what_might_be_expected_1_slideshow.jpg

Contributor

Auto insurance is mandatory to protect other drivers, not you.

0 Kudos
646 Views
2
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@s761539r wrote:

Auto insurance is mandatory to protect other drivers, not you.


That is a key distinction being missed.

0 Kudos
629 Views
0
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@s761539r wrote:

Auto insurance is mandatory to protect other drivers, not you.


Yes, mandatory auto insurance protects the other members of society against the damages your driving creates.

 

Manadory health insurance protects the other members of society against the damages your health creates.

Honored Social Butterfly

To say that you can opt out of auto insurance simply by not driving is akin to saying you can opt out of taxes or ACA premiums simply by not living in the United States.

 

Arguing on hypotheicals is fun but if you do not drive a car in this country, you are a third class citizen.

0 Kudos
260 Views
1
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

 

Arguing on hypotheicals is fun but if you do not drive a car in this country, you are a third class citizen.

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Interesting comment -My wife doesn`t drive a car anymore.
0 Kudos
631 Views
0
Report
Recognized Social Butterfly

Nothappening

 

You are correct with the fact that you can avoid auto insurance by simply not driving.  As some else pointed out, the whole purpose of auto insurance is so that you can pay for damages that you cause to others (this is why comprehensive and collision are not part of the required insurance you need to carry).  So for healthcare, does that mean that if somebody is uninsured they should get treated for free (the hospital can bill them, but if they can't pay it, they can't pay it, so the cost ultimately gets passed on), or should they simply be allowed to die.  Neither situation sounds ideal to me.

0 Kudos
422 Views
14
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

SP362 wrote--You are correct with the fact that you can avoid auto insurance by simply not driving.  As some else pointed out, the whole purpose of auto insurance is so that you can pay for damages that you cause to others (this is why comprehensive and collision are not part of the required insurance you need to carry).  So for healthcare, does that mean that if somebody is uninsured they should get treated for free (the hospital can bill them, but if they can't pay it, they can't pay it, so the cost ultimately gets passed on), or should they simply be allowed to die.  Neither situation sounds ideal to me.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------This is what we had before Obamacare and it worked pretty good and at a much lower cost to everyone. Signs at my hospital used to read -no person shall be refused medical service regardless of their ability to pay. No doubt  every paying  patient`s bill was a little higher but not to the extreme they are today.

 
0 Kudos
407 Views
13
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@easyed598 wrote:

SP362 wrote--You are correct with the fact that you can avoid auto insurance by simply not driving.  As some else pointed out, the whole purpose of auto insurance is so that you can pay for damages that you cause to others (this is why comprehensive and collision are not part of the required insurance you need to carry).  So for healthcare, does that mean that if somebody is uninsured they should get treated for free (the hospital can bill them, but if they can't pay it, they can't pay it, so the cost ultimately gets passed on), or should they simply be allowed to die.  Neither situation sounds ideal to me.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------This is what we had before Obamacare and it worked pretty good and at a much lower cost to everyone. Signs at my hospital used to read -no person shall be refused medical service regardless of their ability to pay. No doubt  every paying  patient`s bill was a little higher but not to the extreme they are today.

 

Easy, the United States has had the highest (Pre ACA) healthcare costs in the developed world while producing mediocre results. Cuba is better then we were in infant mortality for God's sake. Our employer sponsored healthcare made us so non-competitive in global markets that Dubya tried to slap a tariff on Canadian lumber arguing that it amounted to a government support package. 

 

So, we had the highest costs in the world, middling results (at best) and a system which harmed our global competitiveness. What's not to like?

 

If you want to drive in the U.S., you need liability insurance. If you want to live in the U.S. , you need to prove you can affort healthcare. Easy-peasy. 

Honored Social Butterfly

Richva wrote--Easy, the United States has had the highest (Pre ACA) healthcare costs in the developed world while producing mediocre results.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Still do from recent experience

0 Kudos
283 Views
8
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

 


@easyed598 wrote:

Richva wrote--Easy, the United States has had the highest (Pre ACA) healthcare costs in the developed world while producing mediocre results.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Still do from recent experience


Could be. We still don't have government provided, universal coverage which is how every other country keeps its costs down. I find it interesting that the Republicans keep this myth in their heads about how good and inespensive health care used to be. The statistics show a much different story.  

Honored Social Butterfly


@Richva wrote:

 


Could be. We still don't have government provided, universal coverage which is how every other country keeps its costs down. I find it interesting that the Republicans keep this myth in their heads about how good and inespensive health care used to be. The statistics show a much different story.  


In some cases we do, such as the VA. Considering recent revelations about it and the inability to do anything about those guilty, is that really what you want for all Americans?

 

If you want to compare us to Cuba, ask yourself two questions. 1) How many law suites are filed annually against their health care system. 2) When Cuban bureaucrats engage in "cooking the books" so as to get a bonus, what do you suppose would happen to them?

Recognized Social Butterfly


@rk9152 wrote:

@Richva wrote:

 


Could be. We still don't have government provided, universal coverage which is how every other country keeps its costs down. I find it interesting that the Republicans keep this myth in their heads about how good and inespensive health care used to be. The statistics show a much different story.  


In some cases we do, such as the VA. Considering recent revelations about it and the inability to do anything about those guilty, is that really what you want for all Americans?

 

If you want to compare us to Cuba, ask yourself two questions. 1) How many law suites are filed annually against their health care system. 2) When Cuban bureaucrats engage in "cooking the books" so as to get a bonus, what do you suppose would happen to them?


I can't answer your second question.  For your first question, the costs of lawsuits increases healthcare costs by about 3%.  Even adjusting for this cost, we are still paying far more for less than the other 10 richest nations in the world.

Honored Social Butterfly


@rk9152 wrote:

@Richva wrote:

 


Could be. We still don't have government provided, universal coverage which is how every other country keeps its costs down. I find it interesting that the Republicans keep this myth in their heads about how good and inespensive health care used to be. The statistics show a much different story.  


In some cases we do, such as the VA. Considering recent revelations about it and the inability to do anything about those guilty, is that really what you want for all Americans?

 

If you want to compare us to Cuba, ask yourself two questions. 1) How many law suites are filed annually against their health care system. 2) When Cuban bureaucrats engage in "cooking the books" so as to get a bonus, what do you suppose would happen to them?


Trying to get the connection here. The number of lawsuits filed against doctors increases infant mortality? 

Honored Social Butterfly


@Richva wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@Richva wrote:

 


Could be. We still don't have government provided, universal coverage which is how every other country keeps its costs down. I find it interesting that the Republicans keep this myth in their heads about how good and inespensive health care used to be. The statistics show a much different story.  


In some cases we do, such as the VA. Considering recent revelations about it and the inability to do anything about those guilty, is that really what you want for all Americans?

 

If you want to compare us to Cuba, ask yourself two questions. 1) How many law suites are filed annually against their health care system. 2) When Cuban bureaucrats engage in "cooking the books" so as to get a bonus, what do you suppose would happen to them?


Trying to get the connection here. The number of lawsuits filed against doctors increases infant mortality? 


No - high prices. What is your theory about infant deaths?

0 Kudos
630 Views
3
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

Don't know what has Cuba has to do with infant mortality, but if any of you would like to research Cuban infant mortality has always been a lot lower than the one in the US  way before Castro came into power. 

no name
0 Kudos
623 Views
2
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

 


@Roxanna35 wrote:

Don't know what has Cuba has to do with infant mortality, but if any of you would like to research Cuban infant mortality has always been a lot lower than the one in the US  way before Castro came into power. 

 

The point, of course, is not how we compart to Cuba but is our healthcare system working and one good way of measuring is to compare our infant mortality with other contries of similar means.  This graph is a comparison of our infant mortality rate against such countries.  All have universal health care and we did not. We have a "kind of" universal health care under the ACA but Republicans are working hard to cut those people out of the healthcare system while increasing costs. I just don't understand the Republican  drivers.

imrs.php.png

 


 

Recognized Social Butterfly


@Roxanna35 wrote:

Don't know what has Cuba has to do with infant mortality, but if any of you would like to research Cuban infant mortality has always been a lot lower than the one in the US  way before Castro came into power. 


If our healthcare system is on par with a third world country that does not say a lot about us.  The infant mortality rate in Cuba before Castro is hard to impossible to quantify:

"The biggest shortcoming of Cuban mortality statistics in the pre-revolutionary era was, however, is

their incompleteness. In the city of Havana from 1901 to 1951, and possibly as far back
as 1835, death registration is thought to have been virtually complete (Foreign Policy
Association 1935: 95-97; Díaz-Briquets 1981: 400). The same cannot be said for the rest
of the country. González Quiñones and Debasa (1970: 14) used data from the 1943 and
1953 censuses to estimate the degree of incompleteness of death records across the country
as a whole in 1947, 1948, and 1949. They found that only about 57 percent of all deaths,
and only about 36 percent of under-5 deaths, had found their way into the vital registries.
Those who died without medical certification, and infants who survived for less than
24 hours, were omitted from the registries."
0 Kudos
620 Views
0
Report
Recognized Social Butterfly


@easyed598 wrote:

SP362 wrote--You are correct with the fact that you can avoid auto insurance by simply not driving.  As some else pointed out, the whole purpose of auto insurance is so that you can pay for damages that you cause to others (this is why comprehensive and collision are not part of the required insurance you need to carry).  So for healthcare, does that mean that if somebody is uninsured they should get treated for free (the hospital can bill them, but if they can't pay it, they can't pay it, so the cost ultimately gets passed on), or should they simply be allowed to die.  Neither situation sounds ideal to me.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------This is what we had before Obamacare and it worked pretty good and at a much lower cost to everyone. Signs at my hospital used to read -no person shall be refused medical service regardless of their ability to pay. No doubt  every paying  patient`s bill was a little higher but not to the extreme they are today.

 

easyed, that is one of the points.  If everybody's bill used to be a little higher for patients with no insurance, why are they at the extreme they are today and not just similar to what it was before?

0 Kudos
291 Views
2
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

SP362 WROTE--easyed, that is one of the points.  If everybody's bill used to be a little higher for patients with no insurance, why are they at the extreme they are today and not just similar to what it was before?

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The point is-I said a little higher-Insurance Premiums have skyrocketed ,Doctor bills are two and three higher,hospitals prices are out of sight.  Everyone`s cost is a lot higher and it all started with Obamacare.  The medical industry price rise began because they knew the goverment would be backing the  new cost. 75% of Obamacare is being subsidized my Medicaid (Medicare)for low income people and really unfair for those of us who have been paying into Medicare since 1964. Similar circumstances when the government enabled banks to give home loans to people who couldn`t afford them and we all know how that turned out. You can`t legislate people out of poverty.
 
0 Kudos
286 Views
1
Report
Recognized Social Butterfly


@easyed598 wrote:

SP362 WROTE--easyed, that is one of the points.  If everybody's bill used to be a little higher for patients with no insurance, why are they at the extreme they are today and not just similar to what it was before?

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The point is-I said a little higher-Insurance Premiums have skyrocketed ,Doctor bills are two and three higher,hospitals prices are out of sight.  Everyone`s cost is a lot higher and it all started with Obamacare.  The medical industry price rise began because they knew the goverment would be backing the  new cost. 75% of Obamacare is being subsidized my Medicaid (Medicare)for low income people and really unfair for those of us who have been paying into Medicare since 1964. Similar circumstances when the government enabled banks to give home loans to people who couldn`t afford them and we all know how that turned out. You can`t legislate people out of poverty.
 

Our system has been broken since before Obamacare, that is why it needs to be redone.  From Forbes:  "For several years during the 2000s, health care costs were rising rapidly, causing concern among patients and insurance companies. According to the November 2013 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), the primary reason for the rise in health care costs between 2000 and 2011 accounting for 91%, was an increase in the price of drugs, medical devices, and hospital care."

From a National Health Expenditure report "For several years during the 2000s, health care costs were rising rapidly, causing concern among patients and insurance companies. According to the November 2013 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), the primary reason for the rise in health care costs between 2000 and 2011 accounting for 91%, was an increase in the price of drugs, medical devices, and hospital care."

Honored Social Butterfly

   WOW, Donald supporters must be on some weird med if they believe that Ryan / Trumpcare will not eliminate healthcare insurance for many individuals.  

 

    Avrik Roy, a RW Conservative wrote an article for Forbes yesterday:   He chose these words for the title:  

GOP's Obamacare Replacement Will Make Coverage Unaffordable For Millions -- Otherwise, It's Great

 

   That’s not an ironic headline. Leading House Republicans have included a number of transformative and consequential reforms in their American Health Care Act, the full text of which was published Monday evening. But those reforms are overshadowed by the bill’s stubborn desire to make health insurance unaffordable for millions of Americans, and trap millions more in poverty

 

     Apparently some of Donald Supporters  are as mendacious as their candidate. 

PRO-LIFE is Affordable Healthcare for ALL .
Honored Social Butterfly

Healthcare is very different from auto insurance because every American is already in the healthcare system from the day they're born. If an uninsured person has a health emergency, such as a gall bladder attack, appendicitis, etc. they will get proper treatment in the emergency room and the taxpayers will foot the bill. 

 

Republicans always claim they are in favor of accountability and responsibility, but that's not true. What Obamacare mandates is the following. If you can afford health insurance and don't purchase it, you must pay a fine. Doesn't that sound reasonable to most people? It sure beats paying for that irresponsible person's emergency room surgery because they refused to purchase health insurance.

Honored Social Butterfly


@CriticalThinking wrote:

Healthcare is very different from auto insurance because every American is already in the healthcare system from the day they're born. If an uninsured person has a health emergency, such as a gall bladder attack, appendicitis, etc. they will get proper treatment in the emergency room and the taxpayers will foot the bill. 

 

Republicans always claim they are in favor of accountability and responsibility, but that's not true. What Obamacare mandates is the following. If you can afford health insurance and don't purchase it, you must pay a fine. Doesn't that sound reasonable to most people? It sure beats paying for that irresponsible person's emergency room surgery because they refused to purchase health insurance.


Other issues here are that not getting regular healthcare increases the severity of the problem.  it also puts the patient into the most expensive ways of providing healthcare.  

Honored Social Butterfly

I am still not sure I understand the argument.  If it is that you can opt out of mandatory auto insurance (except New Hampshire) by not driving, I guess that is true.

 

Certainly these two items are similar but not exact. I have NEVER seen this kind of push back on requiring auto insurance in order to get a driver's license.

 

It is relatively certain that all of us will need health care. The current system requires all of us to have it. The Republican system will let you pay a penalty and opt in only when you need it.

0 Kudos
385 Views
9
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@Richva wrote:

I am still not sure I understand the argument.  If it is that you can opt out of mandatory auto insurance (except New Hampshire) by not driving, I guess that is true.

 

Certainly these two items are similar but not exact. I have NEVER seen this kind of push back on requiring auto insurance in order to get a driver's license.

 

It is relatively certain that all of us will need health care. The current system requires all of us to have it. The Republican system will let you pay a penalty and opt in only when you need it.


I think you are catching on.  Auto insurance is linked to driving - no driving means you don't NEED to buy insurance.  Obamacare is REQUIRED by all.  There is no link and punitive measures get tougher each year you fail to purchase insurance.  It was a plan that was doomed from the getgo.

Honored Social Butterfly


@NOTHAPPENING wrote:


I think you are catching on.  Auto insurance is linked to driving - no driving means you don't NEED to buy insurance.  Health insurance is linked to being an American - move out of the country means you don't NEED to buy insurance or pay the fee.


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in DC, 1/27/2017
Honored Social Butterfly


@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:


I think you are catching on.  Auto insurance is linked to driving - no driving means you don't NEED to buy insurance.  Health insurance is linked to being an American - move out of the country means you don't NEED to buy insurance or pay the fee.


Health insurance is as much linked to being an American as life insurance.  As anyone can see, there is no linkage at all.  Liberals love mandating everything and love totalitarian governments.

Honored Social Butterfly


@NOTHAPPENING wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:


I think you are catching on.  Auto insurance is linked to driving - no driving means you don't NEED to buy insurance.  Health insurance is linked to being an American - move out of the country means you don't NEED to buy insurance or pay the fee.


Health insurance is as much linked to being an American as life insurance.  As anyone can see, there is no linkage at all.  Liberals love mandating everything and love totalitarian governments.


Republicans orignally came up with the mandate for Health Care Insurance, so don't blame it on "liberals", unless those were "liberal conservatives" !!


Man learns from history that man learns nothing from history.
0 Kudos
629 Views
0
Report
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Does AARP donate to political parties or endorse candidates?

AARP is strictly non-partisan and always has been. We never endorse or donate to candidates, political parties or political action committees.

Learn more.

AARP Members Only Games

Play members only games, like FIll Ins, Lumeno, 2048 and a collaborative, multiplayer Let's Crossword.

Play Now
AARP Members Only Games Logos
AARP Rewards

Solve Crosswords. Earn Rewards. Activate AARP Rewards to earn points for games, quizzes and videos. Redeem for deals and discounts.

Get started with AARP Rewards now!
/html/assets/Rewards-program-badge-355x224.png