Quote:
Originally Posted by BaltimoreSkins
Schneed,
I heard that one of the other issues was that the federal government and insurance providers genuinely were unaware of exactly how unhealthy uninsured American are I am assuming there is truth to that?
It also sounds like you are saying that as long as we do things half assed and have uninsured people we will be stuck with a shitty system.
|
Yes, there is truth to that. And they should have anticipated it, frankly. They should have realized that as soon as you offer people the chance to get their healthcare more affordably, those that NEED healthcare would be the first ones to jump at it. Those who needed it most were sick, quite sick.
And yes, I'd agree. You either need to go all the way, true single payer, no choices, we're all in it by law. Or you need to go all the other way, laissez-faire, no government intervention, let folks sink or swim, if the sick can't afford their health insurance they should get a f'n job and pay for it.
In the words of everyone's favorite sensei, Mr. Miyagi, "Walk right side, safe. Walk left side, safe. Walk middle, sooner or later, get squish just like grape."
Which side of the street you fall upon largely depends on your view on individual responsibility to the shared collective. Some might say we all have a responsibility to one another to fully share the risk, and thus single payer is the only fair solution. Others might say we have no such obligation, my only obligation is to myself and my family, beyond that I'll decide who I want to help. And still others might say it doesn't matter what system you set up, Americans will continue to be unhealthy and overuse healthcare services until they take an ownership in their own wellness, so why should we prop up those who continue to make shitty life choices?
This is a difficult issue that, if you're capable of boiling it down, causes people to reflect on how far they're willing to go to help their fellow man. And even if they're willing, will it actually work?