AFAICT doctors around here agree to accept only what the insurance pays plus the deductible or copay. Anything beyond that means they are either not really covered by your insurance or the doctor is doing something wrong.
The ACA has several levels of coverage for a reason. The lowest level of coverage may cover a lot more than someone who is healthy thinks they need, until the get leukemia or something. Then they become medicaid recipients. People are just not very good assessors of risk, the standards for healthcare was (for the most part) generated by a bunch of actuaries and public health experts. These are the guys telling people that we have been over-testing for things like breast cancer. They are most definitely NOT throwing in a bunch of useless coverage and driving up the price of the bronze level coverage.
This is pretty much the game plan. They don’t think that lighting will strike them and if it does, they won’t die, they’ll just stick us with the bill. And in the meantime, they save a few thousand dollars a year that they can use for baby formula or hookers what business is it of yours.
I really have no idea what your point is. I’m saying that having health insurance is now mandatory, and by choosing not to have it, you have to pay a penalty - you can call the penalty whatever you want that makes you feel better, but it IS still a penalty. According to this site, They call it a penalty, fee, fine, or individual mandate
My original question was if someone doesn’t want to pay for health insurance and decides to pay the fee, fine, or penalty, why don’t they do the same thing for car insurance?
Do you really not understand? The penalty for not having auto insurance is more severe than the penalty for not having health insurance. If you have to choose one to forgo, it should be the health insurance based purely on financial metrics.
The same “they” I assumed you were referring to: the government. And what they do is penalize you for not having insurance.
Though on reflection I see you may have been referring to “someone who doesn’t want to pay for health insurance” as “they.” But to answer your question, a lot of people don’t have car insurance. Others pay because they don’t want to lose their licenses or go to jail.
Yes, I understand this perfectly. However, nobody else was able to state that opinion. Instead it was incomprehensible arguments about what a fee was and things “banned” or “forbidden”
The girl in the scenario posted up thread couldn’t afford health insurance because of spending all her money on “rent, utilities, car insurance, gas, food” etc. It was further explained that [car] insurance was required by law so she HAD to have it. My point was health insurance is now also required by law, but she doesn’t have that. Why not forego the car insurance as well?
Do you know of any news stories of people having to declare bankruptcy due to lack of automobile insurance? And if there are, do they reach the magnitude of stories about people having to declare bankruptcy due to medical bills?
A hedge is a gamble too. Airlines tried to hedge against rising fuel costs and locked in $3/gallon. Now that gas is $1.70/gallon they’re regretting that decision, because they lost that bet.
The thing about insurance is that you can’t expect to “win” like you can in the stock market. It’s like gambling at the casino. Some people may win, but the casino sets things up so that on average, they take in more money than they lose from paying out jackpots. The insurance company has stacked the deck in their favor. On average, their customers will pay more in premiums than they will get in reimbursements. If that wasn’t the case, the insurance companies wouldn’t be in business.
So not only does the insurance company have more information than you, they have tilted the playing field in their favor. I don’t see how it isn’t the same as a lottery. Or an extended warranty. You’re betting that your stuff will break, against a company who knows exactly how often things will break, and has set up the rules so that they can’t lose money on the deal.
It’s a legitimate decision to avoid those costs if you feel that you can’t afford them. And for a lot of people, a lifetime of potential medical bills doesn’t seem all that much worse than a lifetime of certain insurance premiums. Especially when you realize that for an average person, those premiums will cost you more than the medical bills over the long term.
Of course, things are more complicated than that. There’s a lot of nuance to be hashed out, but that’s the basic economic reality of things.
Obamacare is not universal at all. I know people who can’t afford insurance. Hell, I know people who get free insurance but can’t afford the copays. Or they have Medicaid but it doesn’t cover specialists (which is who everyone goes to when their health problem gets beyond the “turn your head and cough” stage).
Universal healthcare is when you can just stop by the hospital, get treated, and nobody mentions money at all, and nobody sends you a bill. UHC is about supplanting the asymmetric customer/insurance company casino-style relationship with a symmetric government/medical industry business relationship. It’s not about just mandating that everyone buys insurance. That’s like Marie Antoinette trying to stifle the revolution by mandating that everyone buys cake. It just helps the bakers and doesn’t alleviate the problem at all.
Not that I want to defend a hospital, but you don’t buy aspirin from a pharmacy – you buy it from a retail store, though maybe one that contains a pharmacy. If a pharmacy, even one in a storefront, actually dispensed aspirin by prescription, it would be considerably more expensive both for the record keeping requirements, the dosage verified, and the fact that the number of pills would have to be individually counted. I have a prescription for aspirin, and I have instructions NOT to buy it from the pharmacy, but over the counter.
That’s why you can’t bring your own. I’m not disputing that they are relatively expensive, but you also get a nurse to deliver the aspirin and make sure you take it, which runs into money.
Everything in a controlled environment costs more. If you don’t believe that, try looking up a catering menu at a hotel or conference center. Be sure you’re sitting down. Coffee costs a lot more than even Starbucks. So, you are also paying overhead for the aspirin.
Just so you know, when my father was 90 and had a heart attack they put in two stents by going in through veins from his legs. No rib cage torn open. He was out of the hospital in two days. But still expensive.
He lived for five more years with no more heart problems, so it wasn’t a waste. No pain and suffering either.
I’d guess your kid would rather you be alive with a stent than get your money.
Paying taxes is mandatory but there are still people who don’t.
Why don’t people get car insurance? Maybe it is too expensive, especially if they have a bad record. Or maybe they are sure that they are safe drivers, will never have an accident, and so don’t need it.
If you don’t have health insurance you might wind up bankrupt and costing others money, but that is about it. If you injure someone without car insurance you might also go bankrupt but also not be able to pay the person you hurt enough in damages. There is uninsured motorist insurance for when one of these clowns hits you, but I don’t know if it covers medical bills or payment for pain and suffering.
There are plenty of folks who for lack of insurance are penalized and either lose their drivers license, or their employment, or both. It’s not a contest to see which outcome is worse - they are both bad outcomes.
If you’re talking just about money, the consequence of not having auto insurance is greater than not having health insurance. Do you contest that?
Combine this with the fact that the penalty for not having health insurance can only be levied against your tax refunds, you could essentially never pay it. Then you have to weigh your relative risk of incurring a large medical bill as compared to your risk of incurring penalties and fines and criminal charges for not having insurance if you are pulled over or involved in a vehicle accident. And in the case of auto insurance, you could also lose your car. Keep in mind the fees above are for the penalty of the offense only, most places will charge up to hundreds of dollars in simple processing fees on top of those amounts.
To me it’s quite clear that when you factor in the chances of each particular event happening that will cost money for either auto insurance or health insurance, if you are need to drive and are relatively healthy, the consequence in dollar terms is much greater for not having auto insurance.
Well, you are only comparing the fees for not having each type of insurance. I would include any costs that arise as a result of not having insurance. As I stated, hundreds of thousands of dollars if you don’t have health insurance and a life-threatening emergency happens.
Even if you are stuck with thousands of dollars of medical bills due to a medical emergency that even happens to relatively healthy people that you have no way to pay?
I understand what you are saying, and if someone makes the decision to have auto insurance instead of health insurance, then that is on them. I just feel they don’t get to complain about health care costs or high medical bills in the event they need medical care.