Quote:
|
Originally Posted by flstf
I think that most people require transportation in order to work and many especially the young do not think they will need a doctor anytime soon.
Those without many assets probably figure they are safe to do without insurance as well since their emergency care will be taken care of with little fear of a hospital collection agency taking much from them to pay the bills.
Those who have assets and are uninsured or under-insured though are very much at risk of losing everything if they get injured or seriously ill. As one poster in this thread pointed out even those with what they thought was good insurance can find themslves in financial trouble after a major illness or injury.
|
I get it on an individual level assuming many uninsured simply value other things higher than they do health insurance. However, I still don't understand the liberal point of view when it comes to healthcare insurance.
I live in the state of California, some consider it the most liberal state in the country. In my state, mandated by law, every worker is covered by workers compensation insurance, Except for The State Fund the system is done with private insurance companies providing the coverage. But there are children in the state without healthcare insurance. Why not mandate coverage for every child and have a safety net health insurer like the State Fund is for work comp.?
The city of San Francisco passes a law against gun ownership, clearly unconstitutional, and will end-up spending millions trying to either enforce this law or defend it in court, but won't spend a dime to make sure every child has health insurance in the city. Why?
PETA will spend millions on protecting endagered owls, but won't spend a dime on making sure children get proper healthcare. Why?
Barbara Striesand could do 4 performances a year, and raise enough money to insure every child in the state, but she doesn't. Instead she spends time complaining about Bush. Why?
Deadbeat dads will blow thousands on a few trips to Vegas every year, but won't buy heath insurance on their children, and are not forced to by law. Why?
You can not drive a car off of a dealer lot without proof of auto insurance, but you can take a baby home from the hospital without proof of insurance on the baby? Why? I could go on but hopefully you understand what I am trying to say.
Is insuring everyone important, or not? It clearly is not, so why pretend that it is? This is what I don't understand.