How much would it cost for the government to cover everyone with high deductible health insurance

[Broomstick]

@CelticKnot

I advocate choice. I have no interest in forcing anyone else to be in the ministry. If someone wants to participate, they can’t whine about the rules. If you don’t like the rules, go play someone else’s game, but kindly let me use the system I want. It almost seems like you think that if you can’t use it, no one should be allowed to. Sour grapes?

Nope, I’ve got coverage.

I do, however, think you are wrong on a couple points.

First, civilization isn’t just about you - it’s also about the rest of us. Do you also advocate “choice” on vaccinations? Do you advocate “choice” on which laws someone has to follow?

Second - it’s not about “can I join your club?” it’s about there being people who have no access to the system. If you don’t get picked for the dodgeball team, well, it’s disappointing but if you don’t have access to healthcare you could be maimed or die. It as if you want to abolish all public education and the only people who could get an education would be the wealthy or maybe folks who belonged to the right church that could provide it - do you think that would improve society?

I want my neighbors educated so their kids can grow up and get an honest job instead of thieving to survive.

I want my neighbors to pay for fire and police protection so we are all safer.

I want universal healthcare so no one has to suffer needlessly, die in agony, or catch and spread disease that could have been prevented.

When your “choice” hurts other people it’s time to look at alternatives.

There is NO nation with universal health care where you are unable to purchase additional insurance if you want it, or go to another country if you don’t want to wait for your non-emergency treatment (yes, including Canada). But we currently have a country where people die because they can’t even get into the waiting line. And that is horribly wrong, stupid, and cruel.

@CelticKnot

It also almost seems like you think not one person in any socialized medicine state has ever lacked treatment or been harmed by a lack or by poor care.

Bad stuff happens - that is, after all, why we have hospitals in the first place. But a LOT MORE people go without treatment or are harmed by the lack of it in THIS country due to your worship of “choice”

And I strongly suspect you are ignorant of some of the facts about health insurance in the USA. As I mentioned, some conditions like cancer, severe injuries, or some (thankfully) rare conditions are horribly expensive. The ONLY way coverage is financially possible for such conditions is if you have a very large risk pool, that is, one with members in the millions. How big is that ministry you get health coverage from? Your current coverage might do well for mundane risks like a broken leg or childbirth, but you might one day find out the hard way that it won’t cover your cancer treatment because there simply are not enough people paying sufficient money in premiums to cover the cost. Which is one reason that bankruptcy due to medical bills is a thing in this country.

I see people like you who advocate private healthcare “choice” - meaning either you pay or you die suffering in the gutter if you can’t pay - like someone backing towards a cliff while setting up a selfie. You have no clue how close to disaster you are. I’m advocating that we put up a safety-rail on the edge of the cliff and you’re complaining I’m ruining your shot.

[Grim_Render]

@CelticKnot

I advocate choice.

I don’t think you do.

If I get ill, I can go see my doctor. If I don’t like my doctor I can go online and change doctor. If I am in another town, I can see another doctor. If I am in another European country, or many other nations across the world, I can go to a hospital or emergency room. If I need hospitalization here, I can pick the hospital, private or public, and be transported there. If I need medicines, I’ll get them. “Affording” or “having money” is not something that I’ll have to think of at all. Nor is filling in a lot of forms or dealing with bureaucrats.

When I change jobs, I never have to consider health insurance. Pay, location, what do I enjoy doing, what are the co-workers like, yes. Health insurance, no. If I want to start a business of my own, I don’t have to consider health insurance for me or my family. I am not in any kind of feudal relationship with my employer. If my partner and I want to have a baby, cost will not be a factor. If I want to take a year off for personal development, health care is not a factor. If I want to retire early, the question is do I have enough money to live, not when can I get on Medicare.

That is choice. That is freedom.

In the US, freedom like that is for the very top of the socioeconomic ladder, not for everyone.

@CelticKnot

None of these things cost me anything I have no interest in forcing anyone else to be in the ministry. If someone wants to participate, they can’t whine about the rules. If you don’t like the rules, go play someone else’s game, but kindly let me use the system I want. It almost seems like you think that if you can’t use it, no one should be allowed to. Sour grapes?

It also almost seems like you think not one person in any socialized medicine state has ever lacked treatment or been harmed by a lack or by poor care.

You should investigate the VA.

People fall through the cracks in every system in every nation. But the US is unique in the western world in that people being denied health care is an intentional part of the system. In other nations it is a glitch, in the US it is a design feature. Not a very christian setup.

And you pay more in taxes for healthcare than almost all other nations.

[HMS_Irruncible]

@Velocity

In order for this UHC to be meaningful, it has to be low-deductible - at most, low enough that Americans could know with confidence that they won’t be facing a hit of more than $100 or $200 at most every time they see a doctor, especially for emergencies.

The deductible ought to be waived at least for preventive medication, with a broad definition of ‘preventive’

Psychologically, also, it is dangerous to have high deductibles. If deductibles are high enough, they deter patients from seeking help. You could have a patient with appendicitis who balks at the thought of paying $500 for an ER visit and decides he’s going to just tough out his lower-right-abdominal pain and fever and hope it gets better - and woot, within days, he now has peritonitis and is looking death in the eye.

Millions of Americans already face this scenario. And it is stupid to bill people for emergency services of any kind, whether it’s firefighting or ambulance transport.

Plus, $500 is really a low deductible. I can’t guess someone else’s thoughts, but I imagine the $500 ambulance ride is not the entire concern; it’s just the harbinger of an endless stream of $500 charges with no clear limit. I took my daughter in for abdominal pain expecting maybe $1000 tops; now I’m processing $25,000 in claims for a ruptured appendix and 2-week hospital stay. I’ll be about $3000 out of pocket on this.

What I’m saying is, yes, a $10K deductible would still be painful, but I’m guessing the certain upper limit would help people feel better about seeking care. People could buy supplemental insurance. (Presumably they’d have some cash left over from them or their employers being otherwise unburdened from medical premiums).

[HMS_Irruncible]

@JohnT

Anyway, in the above example it’s about $5k/year per person. Multiply that by 300,000,000 and you have $1.5 trillion.

It’s worth saying that it would probably end up costing less than $5k if everyone were on the same plan. Duplicated overhead from multiple insurance companies would be eliminated, as well as other duplicated inefficiencies. Larger risk pools should help decrease premiums.

Plus, when we think of the economic advantage of employers not administering health insurance, the economic benefits should be enormous. Whether your political beliefs lead you to believe that money should go toward worker salaries, or management bonuses, or business innovation, there are definite benefits to getting employers out of healthcare.

[Wesley_Clark]

@Orwell

I’ve heard about a 17% tax on wages to fund UHC, which is pretty close to your figure. The problem, as you point out, is that most people look at that and think there’s no way they can afford another 17% coming out of their paycheck. But they forget/ignore the huge cost being paid by their employer. Most employers are paying between $6k and $15k per employee for health insurance, and employees are paying another $1,000 to $2,000 for individual coverage, and more to cover family members. Then, add in co-pays and deductibles.

I’m self-employed, so I have to buy my own insurance. Depending on which level I pick (bronze, silver, gold), my premiums total $12,000 to $20,000 per year to cover just my wife and I. Do you think I would object to paying 17 to 18% of my pay for insurance coverage? That would be a lot less expensive.

Employer coverage is what makes the entire system so difficult for most people to understand. Just like with social security taxes, they forget about what their employer is paying on their behalf.

I can’t even believe I’m posting this, because I’m a libertarian who thinks that government can’t do much properly or efficiently, and I think the federal government is WAY too big because they are involved in too many things. But, it seems clear to me that the insurance and medical industries are so expensive and wasteful, and so bureaucratic anyway, that PHC simply couldn’t be worse… or at least I can’t imagine it being worse.

American GDP is 20 trillion, so where is the other 12 trillion in income if wages are only 8 trillion a year? I assume the other 12 trillion is investment income rather than wages. A health care system funded solely via wages without any funding from investments would not be acceptable to many people. It should be funded by both.

Also even when it is funded by wages, that is a mix of employer and employee share of wages. That share may be 50/50 like it is with medicare and social security, or you can make more of the wages funded by the employer.

Either way, this is my understanding of health care financing.

We currently spend anywhere from 50-70% of all health care spending by the public sector the way things are. If you only count direct government plans it is closer to 50%, but when you add in tax credits, ACA subsidies, health insurance for government workers, etc. it comes in closer to 70%.

Public money accounts for more than 70 percent of health care spending in...

So we don’t need to replace 100% of health care financing. We just need to replace maybe 30% of health care financing with new taxes.

Even medicare for all won’t cover everything. Some exepnses will still be out of pocket (certain electives, etc).

I’ve heard medicare for all could either reduce or increase total medical spending. It could reduce it by lower overhead and provider payments, but it may increase it via higher utilization.

Most expensive case scenario in California, a medicare for all plan there would cost $200 billion in new taxes. With a GDP of almost 3 trillion, that works out to about 7% of GDP going to new taxes to fund the health care system. A mix of payroll taxes (maybe a 5-10% payroll tax split between employer and employees) and taxes on investment income should cover it.

[CelticKnot]

Let me get this straight. In order for UHC to be implemented, no one will be allowed an alternative healthcare payment program and must submit to the totalitarian system. And somehow that is freedom and choice.

How do people “fall through the cracks”? What has kept the poor from getting Medicaid? Why does getting them on taxpayer-funded payment programs mean the destruction of the payment program I have chosen?

Grim Render, we are so far from being rich that if we wanted, we could sign up for taxpayer-funded payment plans (it’s not healthcare), but instead we chose to take responsibility for ourselves. A foreign concept, I know. Between the direct pay clinic, Rx discount plan, and cost-sharing, we spend far, far less than we would even for insurance from our employers. We have enough left over to pay off debts, and when they are gone we will put the money into savings for future healthcare needs.

Again I ask, why would anyone volunteer to allow a corrupt government control over such a huge sector of our economy? How in the world can the people who have made the VA a hellhole not do the same to UHC?

[Wesley_Clark]

Not everyone shares the religious belief of market fundamentalism that the private market is good and public sector is bad. Its a baseless religious belief and lots of people reject it. You might as well say ‘lets let Allah take care of it’ and that would be just as persuasive.

Public sector health care is cheaper and more highly rated than private sector.

[CelticKnot]

@Wesley_Clark

Not everyone shares the religious belief of market fundamentalism that the private market is good and public sector is bad. Its a baseless religious belief and lots of people reject it. You might as well say ‘lets let Allah take care of it’ and that would be just as persuasive.

Public sector health care is cheaper and more highly rated than private sector.

So, not everyone agrees with my faith, so I can’t practice it even thought I have no intention or desire to force others to practice it. I don’t share your faith in public sector “health care”, but you intend to force me to practice it.

[Broomstick]

@CelticKnot

Let me get this straight. In order for UHC to be implemented, no one will be allowed an alternative healthcare payment program and must submit to the totalitarian system. And somehow that is freedom and choice.

No. Universal health care systems DO allow a private health coverage industry to provide additional or alternative coverage. It would be like education - EVERYONE has access to the public system (paid for via taxes) regardless of income but if you choose you can send your kids to a private school (or go to one yourself).

The few exceptions where there isn’t a separate private system still allow you to pay out of pocket or go elsewhere for treatment. You will still have choices.

The problem with maintaining the status quo is that MANY will have no choice at all.

@CelticKnot

How do people “fall through the cracks”? What has kept the poor from getting Medicaid?

Texas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and a few other states DO NOT permit childless adults to enroll in Medicaid no matter how poor. THAT is how people “fall through the cracks”, by rules that exclude them. In some states children will be covered under Medicaid but not adults so the kids are covered but not their parents.

Were you unaware of these facts?

@CelticKnot

Why does getting them on taxpayer-funded payment programs mean the destruction of the payment program I have chosen?

IF the tax-payer funded programs actually covered adults you might have an argument there, but as I noted, that is not the case everywhere in the US.

@CelticKnot

Grim Render, we are so far from being rich that if we wanted, we could sign up for taxpayer-funded payment plans (it’s not healthcare), but instead we chose to take responsibility for ourselves. A foreign concept, I know. Between the direct pay clinic, Rx discount plan, and cost-sharing, we spend far, far less than we would even for insurance from our employers. We have enough left over to pay off debts, and when they are gone we will put the money into savings for future healthcare needs.

And if you get cancer, or a spinal injury, or an amputation, or a significant burn you will be royally and totally screwed. You will be bankrupt, poor, and struggling to get minimal needs covered for the rest of your lives - which, if you find you can not access treatment due to inability to pay may not be long. For example, if you need an organ transplant you can not even get on the waiting list until you first prove that you are able to pay for the transplant AND pay for follow-up care - and your patchwork plan will not be able to do that.

I hope you are fortunate and never have to face those circumstances.

@CelticKnot

Again I ask, why would anyone volunteer to allow a corrupt government control over such a huge sector of our economy? How in the world can the people who have made the VA a hellhole not do the same to UHC?

Because private health care as exists in our country costs twice as much, gets poorer results, and results in tens of millions have NO access to the system at all. Everyone else gets better results with a single-payer system supported by taxes that covers everyone. Why would we be any different?

Oh, right - we’re that stupid and cruel.

American exceptionalism at its worst.

[Broomstick]

@CelticKnot

So, not everyone agrees with my faith, so I can’t practice it even thought I have no intention or desire to force others to practice it. I don’t share your faith in public sector “health care”, but you intend to force me to practice it.

Your right to practice your faith ends where doing so hurts other people.

Tens of millions of Americans don’t have access to the health care system. You’re advocating that that is justified by your “freedom” to practice your “faith”.

Just how moral is this practice of yours?

[Mangosteen]

So Medical Doctors all become Federal employees? How many patients are they required to see per hour? What is the starting salary for a General Practitioner fresh out of Medical School with $100,000 in debt and over 10 years of studying his ass off while History (or whatever) Majors partied until dawn. What is the government salary for a top Brain Surgeon with over 30 years experience? Who decides what the doctor is a worth?

What is the incentive for young people to enter the Medical Field knowing what they are going to spend in time, effort and MONEY when they know they will only become government employees and their pay and hours will be set by some bureaucrats in Washington?

[Grim_Render]

@CelticKnot

Let me get this straight. In order for UHC to be implemented, no one will be allowed an alternative healthcare payment program and must submit to the totalitarian system. And somehow that is freedom and choice.

No, that is precisely wrong. Everyone gets all the alternatives they can pay for. I can go get out-of-pocket healthcare anytime I want. I can sign up for health insurance. Few people do, because it doesn’t really provide any better coverage than the public system, (unless you want vanity surgery or something) but it is available if you want.

We pay much the same in taxes for healthcare. You get nothing for that. I get a healthcare system that means I can chose jobs, having children, retiring, traveling etc, without worrying about health care. That is freedom. You do not have that, and you’ve paid for healthcare once in taxes, and once again through your risk pool. I have freedom and choice. You do not.

Serious question: Why would you think no one would be allowed alternative health care? Where does that come from?

@CelticKnot

How do people “fall through the cracks”? What has kept the poor from getting Medicaid? Why does getting them on taxpayer-funded payment programs mean the destruction of the payment program I have chosen?

It doesn’t. I have no idea why you would think that. I’ve lived in more than one western UHC nation and always had the freedom to chose private payment programs.

@CelticKnot

Grim Render, we are so far from being rich that if we wanted, we could sign up for taxpayer-funded payment plans (it’s not healthcare), but instead we chose to take responsibility for ourselves. A foreign concept, I know.

You really, really need to work to get more familiar with that concept then. Currently you are paying more in taxes for healthcare than almost all western nations. Per person. And only a fraction of your people get healthcare for that. Vast numbers of your countrymen suffer needlessly and you **pay extra **for that. You really need to face up to your responsibilities and sort that out.

@CelticKnot

Between the direct pay clinic, Rx discount plan, and cost-sharing, we spend far, far less than we would even for insurance from our employers. We have enough left over to pay off debts, and when they are gone we will put the money into savings for future healthcare needs.

Not, I am afraid, a realistic prospect. A hip replacement in the US will be charged 40 000 on the average. (And about 12 000 in high-cost Norway, which should tell you something about your system) A knee $ 35 000, average US. Those are not the really expensive ones such as heart surgery or cancer, or something long-running, such as diabetes. And if you do have surgery and pay for it, that does not mean you have paid your lifetime costs. You will be more likely to need further health care. As you age and your body grow more frail, I suspect that stragey will not prove adequate.

And you pay more in taxes for healthcare than most UHC nations. Per person, not in total, and not per taxpayer. You’ve already paid for UHC, you are just arguing against to it being delivered.

@CelticKnot

Again I ask, why would anyone volunteer to allow a corrupt government control over such a huge sector of our economy? How in the world can the people who have made the VA a hellhole not do the same to UHC?

Well, I’d rather dispute the term “Hellhole” for the VA. But that is a different issue.

“Again I ask, why would anyone volunteer to allow a corrupt government control over such a huge sector of our economy? How in the world can the people who have made the Detroit schools a hellhole not do the same to public schooling?”

“Again I ask, why would anyone volunteer to allow a corrupt government control over such a huge sector of our economy? How in the world can the people who made the Bay of Pigs a hellhole not do the same to a national military?”

Repeat for roads and infrastructure, police, fire services, courts, etc, etc.

Now there is actually an entire branch of economics that deal with how healthcare economics work and its pretty settled on it suffering market failure in a market without heavy regulations. This is supported by the real-world experience of 40-odd nations over the last half century.

By in my case, I believe it because I have lived in the US, the UK and Norway for extended amounts of time, and the US system is far inferior. Not by a small margin. My personal experience, and the experiences of everyone I ever met over the decades. Its not something I’ve been told by interest groups shoveling money into fearmongering.

If you believe your government and nation less capable than every other western nation, surely the correct response it to improve your government rather than make a six-figure number of your fellow citizens into human sacrifices.

[Grim_Render]

@Mangosteen

So Medical Doctors all become Federal employees? How many patients are they required to see per hour? What is the starting salary for a General Practitioner fresh out of Medical School with $100,000 in debt and over 10 years of studying his ass off while History (or whatever) Majors partied until dawn. What is the government salary for a top Brain Surgeon with over 30 years experience? Who decides what the doctor is a worth?

What is the incentive for young people to enter the Medical Field knowing what they are going to spend in time, effort and MONEY when they know they will only become government employees and their pay and hours will be set by some bureaucrats in Washington?

Physicians get paid whatever they can negotiate with their employer. Which might be a private hospital, a private clinic, a private company, etc. Or the government, which as the biggest employer has considerable negotiating power, but then physicians are highly employable. Generally recent graduates start work in pubic healthcare and the ones that prioritize money end up in a lucrative specialization in the private sector.

US courts are public concerns, right? With everyone entitled to legal representation. So all lawyers are federal employees with wages set by the government and a set number of clients they are required to see then? Who decides what a to tax lawyer with 30 years of experience is worth then?

[Broomstick]

@Grim_Render

Serious question: Why would you think no one would be allowed alternative health care? Where does that come from?

She gets that from propaganda spread by the private healthcare industry in the US and conservative “think” tanks.

@Grim_Render

It doesn’t. I have no idea why you would think that. I’ve lived in more than one western UHC nation and always had the freedom to chose private payment programs.

She gets that from propaganda spread by the private healthcare industry in the US and conservative “think” tanks.

@Grim_Render

If you believe your government and nation less capable than every other western nation, surely the correct response it to improve your government rather than make a six-figure number of your fellow citizens into human sacrifices.

[nitpick] You’re off two orders of magnitude, there - it’s actually an eight-figure number, about 27 million these days. [/nitpick]

[Grim_Render]

@Broomstick

She gets that from propaganda spread by the private healthcare industry in the US and conservative “think” tanks.

One would think, with todays easy access to citizens of all nations, she could just ask people who live with UHC,rather than base opinions on what people with huge financial interest spend $$$ on telling her. GQ thread or something.

@Broomstick

[nitpick] You’re off two orders of magnitude, there - it’s actually an eight-figure number, about 27 million these days. [/nitpick]

Sadly… I extrapolated from actual yearly deaths. Mortality amenable to healthcare, which is the number of under-65s deaths per year that could have been prevented with access to timely and appropriate healthcare. OTTOMH the US has about 70 000 - 100 000 more deaths that you’d expect when compared to the top 3 UHC nations.

I figured they are not a human sacrifice until dead.

.

[Northern_Piper]

@Mangosteen

So Medical Doctors all become Federal employees? How many patients are they required to see per hour? What is the starting salary for a General Practitioner fresh out of Medical School with $100,000 in debt and over 10 years of studying his ass off while History (or whatever) Majors partied until dawn. What is the government salary for a top Brain Surgeon with over 30 years experience? Who decides what the doctor is a worth?

What is the incentive for young people to enter the Medical Field knowing what they are going to spend in time, effort and MONEY when they know they will only become government employees and their pay and hours will be set by some bureaucrats in Washington?

I don’t know how it works in other countries with UHC, but that’s certainly not how it works in Canada. We have single payer, not single employer.

Doctors here aren’t government employees. They’re in private practice, running their own businesses. They operate their own clinics, hire their own staff. Once they’ve seen the patient, they send in their bill to the Medicare office and get paid.

The payment schedule is highly detailed and negotiated by the doctors’ associations and the government. Both sides have considerable bargaining power. The government because it pays them, and the doctors because they provide an essential service. It’s not some single bureaucrat who has that decision-making power. It’s done through negotiations.

And, it’s not done in Ottawa. Each province and territory has their own pay schedule, to adapt to local conditions.

As for why young students would want to become doctors - we’ve had this system for 50+ years, and students continue to apply to med school, which turns candidates away in a highly competitive admissions process. I assume that means they think it’s a good financial deal, in addition to personal satisfaction with that career choice.

[Northern_Piper]

@CelticKnot

We keeping hearing from politicians that the DC is utterly corrupt and totally sold out to corporations. Why should I then want to give DC more control over my life?

If the US governments truly are so corrupt that you can’t trust them to provide basic public services, you truly have my pity. You make it sound like the great American experiment in democracy has failed.

But I don’t see how a public run UHC system gives a government control over your life. Grim Render’s already covered that, and I’ve touched on it as well. Our UHC system means I can go anywhere in Canada, on business, on vacation, or just because I feel like it, without worrying about health coverage. I don’t have to stay in a job I don’t like because I need the healthcare insurance that job offers. I get to choose my doctor, rather than have them assigned to me by the government, or being given a network list by my insurance company. (Some doctors won’t be taking new patients, if they have a long-established practice, but then you just look for a young doctor starting out.). Any time I’ve needed a specialist, my GP tells me which ones are in the city, and I pick which one to go to. I choose which hospital to go to in an emergency, without worrying if it’s in network. Where is the totalitarian government running my life?

Seriously, if you’re going to use language of totalitarianism and lack of choice, you’ll have to give concrete examples, rather than vague statements of ideology.

Have you ever needed an MRI? There are third world countries with more MRI machines per million than Canada. Wait times for treatment are horrifying.

yes I have, actually. Two or three times. I can’t remember whether it was two or three, because access to the MRI was such a non-event. I needed MRIs done, and they were done. Not a biggie.

The first was for a wonky knee that was giving me trouble. MRI showed a bit of cartilage had broken off, but it had migrated away from the trouble are and no surgery needed. Yay me - the government provided MRI service kept me from having to go under the knife!

The other one e (or two) was for a nasal issue, again to guide doctor’s decision about surgery. MRI was done, treatment decided on, and everything’s fine.

As for wait lists, read **Zyada’s ** post again. Priority is decided by triage. Someone showing potentially serious neurological issues gets access immediately, because it could be life-threatening. Someone like me, with a couple of chronic issues that weren’t life-threatening or life-changing, had to wait a while.

But that seems to me to be entirely consistent with my view of Christian values: the community looks after the people in the greatest need first, but also makes sure everyone gets looked after in due course, based on the seriousness of their need.

[Northern_Piper]

And with respect to the choice issue: we don’t pay insurance premiums, if that’s what’s bothering you. We pay taxes. Those taxes support all the public services: police, fire, highways, education, military, healthcare. I may not agree with all of the spending decisions my governments make, but that’s what living in a democracy is about. The majority decides priorities, and I don’t get to refuse to pay taxes because I don’t agree with priorities set by the government. Do you?

Health care is just one more basic government service. But if I don’t like the service provided, I have a choice. I can go elsewhere in the world to get healthcare, if I can afford it.

[CelticKnot]

@Broomstick

Your right to practice your faith ends where doing so hurts other people.

Tens of millions of Americans don’t have access to the health care system. You’re advocating that that is justified by your “freedom” to practice your “faith”.

Just how moral is this practice of yours?

Some people choosing to not depend on government hurts others? Explain.

I thought ACA was going to solve all these problems. It didn’t? And so now you want the same people who screwed it up to try to fix it again? How in the world can there be any faith that they won’t foul everything up and waste $billions more? The world survived for a long time without UHC. Why don’t we change the laws that gave us the situation we are in instead of just making it worse?

[Northern_Piper]

If I choose not to rely on government police services, fine. But if I then say, “so I’ll vote against funding for police services because I choose not to rely on them,” I’m imposing my choice on others.

Same with health care. If you choose not to rely on government funded health care, that’s your choice. But if you then vote against establishing government funded health care because you don’t want to use it, you’re trying to impose your choice on those who do want it.

Which isn’t to say you can’t use the political,process to block government funded health care. That’s your right, as a citizen, to try to shape government policy through the ballot box. But don’t try to dress up your opposition to government health care on the basis of choice. If the government doesn’t fund health care, that says that people don’t have a choice. They’re on their own, whether they like it or not.