Shouldn't it be my choice as to whether I insure it or not, similar to the woman's right to choice argument. My body, my choice.
That comparison is a non sequitur. Your earlier auto insurance comparison is more appropriate. And if you're alive, you've got a vehicle that you're using. But as I noted earlier, when you cease to have a living body, just as when you cease to have an automobile on the road, there will be no need to insure. Now you have something to look forward to.
I struggle with this myself. It's the American in me. We dream of a state of affairs where we are the rugged self-sufficient individualist, not really needing (though we will cooperate with similarly strong individuals) the help of others, or of government. An unachievable ideal, for sure, particularly for a social animal, but it is an ideal with merit, and it supplies a faithful side to the great argument (what is Man's true nature?).
It does follow if you think of it in the terms of personal independence, but I won't belabor the point. I will ask, why should you pay for my vehicle just because I can't afford too? Yes, it's the humane thing to do, but the money has to come from somewhere. My argument would be, is the government the best organization to run this operation? You know as well as I do that not too far down the road we will all be paying considerably more money for consideraly less care. And what will be the solution offered up by our government? Throw more money at it, as per usual. What we have is a tax that will never go anywhere but up, and will be expanded to a variety of ever growing healthcare concerns. Since just about all behavior effects health, all behavior will eventually be taxed.
because if your vehicle ends up dead in the street the rest of us have to clean up the mess. we dont want to view and smell your rotting carcass in the street. when we clean up your mess it costs us money. we dont want to spend that money on you when we know you had the means to cover yourself so we require you to be responsible now. just like car insurance..
Your argument assumes I have the means to pay, in which case I agree, but my question was who pays for the person that doesn't have the means? As stated over and over again, the money has to come from somewhere. Who is best qualified to oversee all that money? Historical evidence would clearly tell us it ain't Uncle Sam.
almost every person who has any type of insurance does not have the means to pay a worst case senario. that is why the concept of insurance uses cost sharing to mitigate risk. government only steps in when the private market fails. that there are 50 million plus people in this country without health care is evidence that the private market can not or will not step up and provide a solution.
Which is the point of medicaid, no? What IS the purpose of obamacare, in practice we already had universal healthcare.