Health Insurance?

[seer]

What is the general take about having to buy health insurance by law or pay a fine? If I remember correctly Steve never did have health insurance, he had objections to insurance.

[steve]

I have never purchased health insurance and raised all my kids without any insurance. My new wife has insurance provided through her work, which covers me as well. This is the first time I have had insurance, would not personally get any, if it was left to me. My wife will probably retire in the next few years. She and I will lose our insurance then, which is fine with me.

For the government to make it a crime not to buy insurance is certainly an intrusion into what should be our constitutional rights to buuy or not buy any given commodity.

[Tres]

“Socialized medicine is the keystone of the arch to the Socialist State.” - Vladimir Lenin and echoed by Ronald Reagan

[robbyyoung]

Hello All and God Bless,

The frustration I have on this issue, and others, is the federalization of program after program. The real evil in what our, so-called, representatives are doing is the selling of their respective "states sovereignty" and "soul" to THEIR federal BEAST! Americans don't seem to care enough though to change what's going on. Sure, some grass roots organizations may attempt to take on the "BEAST", like the Tea Party, who inevitably fall into despair when politics is played on the masses of sheepole, to stop them dead in their tracks.

However, some States aren't falling for the banana in the tailpipe trick. We have 50 laboratories in our union to help put forth the best ideas to make our Nation strong and we are blowing it. It's a one shoe fits all Nation of leaders, sad but true. They could have easily had their "health care" for all States by doing it this way:

1. Congress passes a law that all states will provide insurance for their citizens by "suspense date".
2. Each State will then determine how best to provide insure for their citizens.

Compromises and negotiations can be made for federal assistance, of course, but will in no wise be advantageous to do so. This forces State representatives to budget, plan, and actually work for the people. Imagine that.

We have brilliant individuals across the board in our society WHO WILL come up with ingenious ways to make government/programs work efficiently. 50 laboratories, will can and would've figured it out.

But instead, we have Obamacare??? Great...

[seer]

I have never purchased health insurance and raised all my kids without any insurance. My new wife has insurance provided through her work, which covers me as well. This is the first time I have had insurance, would not personally get any, if it was left to me. My wife will probably retire in the next few years. She and I will lose our insurance then, which is fine with me.

Well we are all getting close to Medicare anyway! ; )

For the government to make it a crime not to buy insurance is certainly an intrusion into what should be our constitutional rights to buuy or not buy any given commodity.

Of course it is an intrusion, but at this point it would probably make more sense to buy insurance than to pay the fines, which get increasingly more expensive.

[Singalphile]

I had heard that it will in fact be a crime not to buy qualifying insurance, at least for many individuals. But that may have changed when the Supreme Court redefined it as a tax, which is how they (1 of 'em, anyway, thus gaining 5 of 9 approval) decided it was constitutional ("The Affordable Care Act's requirement that certain individuals pay a financial penalty for not obtaining health insurance may reasonably be characterized as a tax." *).

If it will be a crime to not buy health insurance, then I guess we ought to obey the law and do it, like it or not. If it has been redefined as merely an optional tax (as in, instead of wearing a helmet, I paid the policeman's no-helmet "tax"), then I guess that a person could do whatever he or she thinks is best.

Even without this new law, the private Christian health care sharing plans seem like a good idea to me. These are apparently the major three: http://samaritanministries.org/, http://www.chministries.org, http://mychristiancare.org/medi-share.

I dislike the new law as much as the next guy. "Free" government-operated or funded health/hospital care, paid for with an across the board tax increase would be preferable, imo. Not that I think that would be a good idea either, but it would at least make sense. This mandated health insurance thing is really just absurd, imo.

[Paidion]

In Canada, it was the far left who brought in county-wide health insurance. Health care is the responsibility of each province. A Canadian doesn't have the option to "buy" or not. In Ontario where I live, you go to a doctor, get recommended for surgery if necessary, obtain the surgery, and pay nothing for any of these services from your own pocket. In your income tax, you do pay a particular amount, geared to your income, for health services (The Ontario Health Insurance Plan). Last year, I paid $300 for the entire year.

I am politically conservative, but I applaud the Health care system in Canada. Had I been in United States it would have been impossible for us to pay for the necessary surgeries which my wife and I required. These surgeries made a significant difference in our well-being. It is true that in some cases a patient must wait for surgery. The wait was insignificant for both my wife and me.

Beside this health system, I also have private insurance for medication and dentistry through the retired teachers organization. This is also a great help. This insurance is optional, of course. But the major system is not. I am not at all disappointed with the fact that it is mandatory.

[robbyyoung]

In Canada, it was the far left who brought in county-wide health insurance. Health care is the responsibility of each province.

Hello and God bless Paidon,

Maybe our so-called "State Representatives" should take a hiatus to Canada, and learn. But unfortunately, our nation's capitol is extremely evil and until Americans take back their power from the Feds, we are doomed!

[thrombomodulin]

This insurance is optional, of course. But the major system is not. I am not at all disappointed with the fact that it is mandatory.

Are you affirming that God has granted Caesar the authority to administer the health care of his subjects? On what basis would you conclude one way or the other? Your experience may well have been that you received services that you valued more highly than the costs personally incurred to yourself, but surely there are some who felt otherwise. Would such men be right in saying that they were wronged by being expropriated due to the mandatory nature of the system? Should we not regard mandatory insurance as a form of theft and oppose it, because we affirm that it is ok to take another's property against their wishes?

[Paidion]

Are you affirming that God has granted Caesar the authority to administer the health care of his subjects?

No. The Kingdom of God and the kingdoms of this world are quite separate entities. In Canada, universal health care has been worked out by finite though intelligent minds, and I think most people are benefited by a universal health care system.

Your experience may well have been that you received services that you valued more highly than the costs personally incurred to yourself, but surely there are some who felt otherwise.

I am not aware of anyone in Canada who opposes the universal health care system which has been established here. Some are concerned with the waiting periods in some cases.

Would such men be right in saying that they were wronged by being expropriated due to the mandatory nature of the system?

Some men complain that they are being robbed by the income tax system itself. No matter WHAT governments do, there are a significant number of complaining people. A good government tries to do what will best benefit the vast majority.

Should we not regard mandatory insurance as a form of theft and oppose it, because we affirm that it is ok to take another's property against their wishes?

We can regard it that way if we wish. I doubt that we "should" regard it that way. "Should" we regard the income tax system as a form of theft? Or is that not to be considered since it is so deeply and firmly entrenched?