Is MANDATORY Health Care Insurance the same as MANDATORY auto Insurance?

Another-words, if I don't have it because I can't afford it, can I get penalized for not having it?
Another related question would be: Will there be folks who can not afford MANDATORY health Insurance and what is to become of them?

reasoning that you do not deserve a privilege you cannot afford.

Thus, those who cannot afford health insurance will be summarily executed, since obviously those unwilling to insure their health do not deserve a privilege they cannot afford.

This works for all y'all, right?

I keep hearing about MANDATORY health care insurance. I am already aware that I am less then fond of MANDATORY auto insurance because there are many folks who can NOT afford it. I am asking my question because I want to know if this new MANDATORY Health care insurance that some of our candidates are talking about is going to be set up the same way.

minimum policy.

No one is proposing a penalty - but Mass has one and I'd expect the federal to have one also - in Mass it is reduction in the personal income tax deduction plus a tax of one half of the years required contribution for your income level. While a massive number get the coverage for free, the majority are looking at - based on Mass - subsidized monthly amounts that top out at $4,000 per year for those around $50,000 of income.

most policies that I have examined (sort of including the one in Mass that my brother has to suffer) include a fine - typically quarterly - that accrues on the criminals tax records. Once taxes come due, so too does the "insurance bill"/fine. To my knowledge they cannot be avoided, and of course the government decides whether or not you can afford the insurance. Just another scam to get money from taxpayers without calling it a tax.

Better?

except you gotta remember, taxes go to the government. Insurance is a private industry that benifits from the fact that we as citizens have to have it. insurance has always been a scam just think about the industry. Its a buisness that takes your monthly fee based upon certain factors then states "if something bad happens and it falls within these guidelines we will pay for it" thats all it is.

Their bottom line does not coincide with our bottom line. They are motivated by PROFIT, We are motivated by the common needs of the group, we seek some sort of Universal Coverage. I keep hearing that Mandatory Health Care Insurance will stimulate the Middle Class, I am trying to figure out how much of that "stimulation" will come out of our own pockets.

My fears are that the Middle Class and the Poor may get stuck paying for MANDATORY health care Insurance. I believe fully that America should have universal health care but I am disturbed by what I am hearing so far, it is likely that I am interpreting things wrong, this is why I seek advice from folks here...

I belive, and I could be mistaken, but I believe that both the Edwards & clinton plans will charge you a fine if you don't get it right away, but the Obama plan is only mandatory for children.
And, the resoning behind that is kids don't have a choice, so the parents are required.
And if they can't afford it, the govt' will drop the charge to something they can afford.

Requiring people to buy health insurance, but giving them no choice between public and private insurance providers is going to backfire with higher costs to consumers and less coverage overall.

Requiring people to buy health insurance when you're offering them a choice between public and private insurance coupled with offering them help to buy it if they can't afford it is better. It also has to be coupled with strong initiatives to protect consumers, force competition and efforts to lower health care costs.

That would be the difference as I perceive it as well. From what I understand there is supposed to be aid for those who can not afford it, (unlike mandatory auto insurance). So is this "aid" intended to cover ALL who can not afford it? Will it be enough?

Public insurance (Medicaid, Medicare, etc.) is inherently less expensive than private insurance because it cuts out the middleman and the profit. Its normally as much as one third the cost of public health insurance.

I've also seen some reports indicating that such a plan (public & private health insurance networks) could eventually pay for itself if key cost cutting measures are adopted, including allowing Medicare to negotiate prices for prescription drugs.

Forgive my ignorance here, I am a vet. I go to the VA Hospitals for all my needs. I suspect if I could not do so, I would be stuck... Like many vets, I am not able to afford public Health Insurance as it is now. Like many vets, I can not afford dental either. The notion that I may be forced to purchase a MANDATORY insurance, REGARDLESS of how cheap it is, is a bit alarming to me...hence my questions

for those who can't afford it. If consumers aren't given a choice and are pushed towards a private insurance plan, the government will pay two to three times more for those subsidies. That's why private insurance companies are backing the plans that don't give consumers a choice. Like Big Pharma and the Medicare prescription drug program, its a big opportunity for the private insurance companies to make huge profits at taxpayer expense.

so much smoke and mirrors to get We The People to vote for a candidate who has the needs of the Insurance Industry ahead of the needs of We The People? Another words, if Mandatory Health Insurance becomes law, will the primary benefit, ($$$) go to the Insurance Industry while the smaller benefit goes to the working poor as health care and little to no benefit finds it's way to the Middle Class?

That pretty much sums it up.

those insured from having to pay for those who aren't. The difference is, health care is available NOW for the very poor (Medicaid), and will remain there. From all the HC plans I've heard and read, all of them propose gov't assistance for those who cannot afford to buy HC insurance but make too much to be eligible for Medicaid.

That's not the same with auto ins. It is assumed that you don't HAVE to have a car, so there's no assistance that I know of to help pay for ins. on one. Everyone's auto ins. is higher because if your car is hit by someone without ins., YOUR ins. will pay for it and go after the offending driver for the money. You will still have to pay your deductibles, and will get them refunded IF they ever collect the full amount. Most of the time they don't, so those extracharges are passed through to all of us who do have insurance.

Hospital costs are higher because they MUST care for anyone who comes to their ER. When the uninsured can't pay, those costs hae to be covered by someone! Guess who?

...would Senator Clinton's plan cover ALL who could not afford it? Is it on some kind of sliding scale? I suppose my question should be: "Is this a plan which is the best of both worlds: keeping the poor insured without burdening the insurance companies?" Are the other canditates offering up the same thing?

And promises you won't pay more than a certain percentage, but doesn't say what the percentage is.

Edwards' does not mandate insurance until after the entire plan is in place. I don't know if he is using tax credits or subsidies.

Obama's plan mandates for kids, but we've got good programs for kids and they're pretty cheap for middle income parents. He plans subsidies. He has said he'd consider a mandate if necessary to bring in any straggleres, but he thinks people will pay if they can afford it and he does't want unintended consequences before the details are worked out.

I know he keeps talking about stimulating the Middle Class AT THE EXPENSE of the corporations...a very Roosevelt way of doing things...I suspect he would NOT be putting forth a plan which has as it's primary beneficiary the Insurance Industry. So far, I am liking the things Edwards says but I needed input on what everyone else is planning when it comes to Health Care Change...hence this thread...it appears to be working too, I am getting great feedback, thank you for yours.

His plan allows choice including private insurance and would subsidize insurance just like everybody elses.

I figured Edwards at least wouldn't have gone down that road...I figured that he would be the candidate most likely to put forward a plan that benefited the needs of We The People OVER the needs of the Insurance Conglomerates. I figured this from listening to his speeches. The Middle Class is in drastic needs of stimulous...lest we wind up in the Second Great Depression. I was getting the impression that Edwards was on that page too...

We might be able to go to straight govt management some day, but phasing it in isn't a bad idea. But he, and Obama, will have a public plan that people can choose as an option. Or they can get subsidized insurance. Obama's plan has mandates on the insurance policies so that they provide at least the basic coverage that the public plan will provide. Every policy must accept everybody, premiums will be regulated. It sounds a lot like some of the European systems. They aren't all single payer. And Canada doesn't cover medication, where many of the European plans have a small fee for meds. My health insurance is subsidized and I am so grateful. It makes me mad that people fight against it when so many people would be able to see a doctor, and it's such an easy thing to do.

He realizes that this will be an enormous change and needs to be phased in so people will feel comfortable with it. And to be realistic, the insurance companies would go ballistic if we try to take over their whole operation at once. There will be at least one public choice in each health care market that the plan sets up, and it's likely that so many people will go for that because of the cost savings that in time everybody will be switched over. In addition, the government will put the brakes on the insurance companies in terms of cost and will prohibit cutting people off because of pre-existing conditions, which is a huge problem.

Here is a link to the Edwards health plan in depth:

http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/health-care/

Perhaps I missed it, it was a quick perusal. I am a veteran. All I need to do is go up to any VA hospital and show them my card in order to get treatment. Depending on the nature of the help needed I can either get in quickly or over time. Currently I am now one of the vets who is on a program, I have a Health Care Provider, (Doctor), who keeps me scheduled for regular check ups. If my needs go beyond that I have only to call in and arrangements are made.

If I did not have the VA as my safety net, I would be in dire straits indeed. I do not put it past the Cons to take even this away from me, hence my caution over everyone else's plan. I missed where Edwards plan could help me if I did not have the VA.

In my estimation, health care should be a right, not a privilege. We are a rich enough nation where that attitude should be the norm. We expect the military to protect us, we expect the police to protect us, we expect the fire department to protect us,...these things come with the territory, health care SHOULD be there too. Why do WE THE PEOPLE need to have this vampire better known as the Insurance Industry calling the shots at all on a decision they should not be a party to.

Thanks for the link, I'll need to research this better... not bitching at you dragonlady... I guess I am just a bit disappointed that all these Health Care plans involve the needs of the Insurance Industry to some point. As you see, I am not overly fond of them right now because I feel they are part of the problem and their bottom line, "PROFIT", impacts on their abilities to be a part of the solution.

I'm sure Edwards would not end the VA medical system, so you would continue with the VA care that you are getting. His plan says that people wouldn't be buying their own insurance if they are covered by their job or by public programs like Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, and others (page 4 of the PDF). But here are some parts from the Edwards plan that would apply to people with lower incomes:

(page 3)
There would be a tax credit to make insurance affordable. Middle class families would get an amount based on a sliding scale. People who didn't make enough to owe tax would get a “refund” anyway to use for the insurance (this would work like the earned income credit, I think).

The federal government would help the states to expand Medicaid and SCHIP to cover all adults with income under the poverty line (currently $10,210 for one person) and all children and their parents under 250 percent of the poverty line (about $50,000 for four persons).

Insurance companies must open plans to everyone and charge fair premiums, regardless of preexisting conditions, age, job, or other characteristics.

(page 4)
The Health Care Markets that will offer choices of insurance policies will negotiate low premiums through economies of scale and will hold down administrative costs so people who pay for their own insurance will face lower bills than is the case now.

Special exemptions from having to get insurance would be made in case of extreme financial hardship or religious beliefs.
_________________________________________________________

Hope that helps! Health insurance is one of my biggest issues in deciding on a candidate, and I think Edwards has the best thought out and most do-able plan.
For those who need the link to the full Edwards plan: http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/health-care/

Thank you for researching this data dragonlady... It appears that my earlier fears were unfounded about Edwards.
I never felt that any of the Dems would touch my VA benies, it is the 'cons I worry about there. As long as the 'cons don't take back the Congress or find a way to reinstall themselves back into the White House, we vets are likely safe...for now.

I was worried for those who are at or below poverty level being forced to purchase MANDATORY Health Care Insurance when clearly, many of us can ill afford to pay for much of anything. That is still the case with auto-insurance... many of us can not afford it either. Sadly, all I hear from folks are things like: "Well the reason it is so high is because too many folks like you are not purchasing it!" My best friend is an insurance agent for State Farm and she has NO problem saying that very thing to me. I would dearly LOVE to have auto insurrance...so do I give up eating or heat in my home or...well you get the idea.

For the poor's sake, I hope Senator's Clinton and Obama have something similar in mind to John Edwards's plan as you have laid it out... I hope NOBODY is left behind, like what happened when the Insurance Agencies found a way to make their services MANDATORY for "everyone's" sake. I hope the $$ burden does not fall on the Middle-Poor Classes either.

If our Government gets this right, it could be a GREAT economic stimulus for America and boy do we need one of those!

any of their plans have been fleshed out in enough detail to completely answer your questions. I would suggest you go to each of their web sites and see exactly what's posted there. I know that all the candidates were still talking aobut negotiating with the ins. companies, which on it's face tells you the details still have to be worked out. None that I know of have gotten to the actual detail that states how much assistance there would be and at what income level.

In all fairness to each of them, those things can't really be decided until negotiations are complete. The one thing I did hear Hillary say was that she would demand that the insurance companies cover all who applied and eliminate the pre-existing condition clauses they currently have. The others may have said the same, and I just haven't heard it.

I figured with all the well informed DUers here I could get a thread going where we had the chance to examine the topic, without the spin the candidate would have on it. I fear that we, (the Middle Class), may be being hoodwinked and it was my hopes that folks here could either confirm or aleave my fears. I also felt it could be a good topic for discussion...perhaps an education for those such as myself who genuinely do not understand this topic so well.

they have to pay the full price. I had an ER bill that was $800 and I had to pay the whole thing, even the $500 part of it that was unnecessary x-rays. Later I had insurance and got an $800 bill which the insurance paid $400 or so and I paid a $100 co-pay and it was settled. My knee surgery was even more amazing because they billed about $4500 and the insurance company paid only about $1700. Seems to me that if I had been uninsured, they would have made more money off of me.

I mistakenly got billed for lab tests, over $800. Insurance paid it in full for under $200.
Same with MRI and such tests.
The full price goes on the back of those who can least afford it.

have children. Childless adults who are not disabled do not get that help.

If they are low enough income I assume they would get help paying under all the candidates plans. The threshold for assistance is bound to be too low though. With everything costing so much...gas and heat and living costs and student loans...they might be well above poverty level (or above 3 X it) and still not have enough money.

can be seen as a tax hike on marginal workers who can't afford the insurance premium, get socked for more taxes at the end of the year, and remain uninsured.

Any plan a corporatist has anything to do with is a BAD PLAN.

I would say that corporations have as a bottom line "Profit", I have no beef with capitalism. That said I would also like to see WE THE PEOPLE have the last vote on those things which directly affect our bottom line: "Democracy"! Sadly This is not the status quo these days. So yes, the corporatist should be allowed to tend to the corporation but no they should not be allowed to affect our nation without OUR final say so in the process.

If they want to enjoy the fruits of OUR labors, under OUR Democracy, they must be made to sign on to the concept that they are NOT given the right to govern us, WE THE PEOPLE reserve the right to govern them. Democracy = WE THE PEOPLE not We The Corporations

I am feeling what you say about the marginal workers in more ways than one. I would be considered in that group, the working poor. I fear having to pay for this MANDATORY health care insurance in some way shape or form...

there's really no comparison. There really are a lot of people who live near bus lines or public transportation and decide not to own a car. You CAN decide not to own a car, unfortunately, you can't just decide never to get injured or sick.

I loved that "third time...Houston we have a problem". I agree with you. We pay insurance for every imaginable future event that may happen. And yet..when the thinkable future event happens..it doesn't happen in such a way as you get covered..completely, or sometimes not at all. Insurance Companies play the odds, but they're also the house.

The thing is, $25,000 hospital bill, $5,000 hospital bill. Hell I'm still bankrupt. And if I have to pay a monthly payment on the $5,000 hospital bill, I really can't afford the premium of unknown amount. I don't object to mandates at some point, but we better make sure we aren't making people homeless before we start adding unknown amount of money to everybody's monthly bills.

And if you really want to crack up, you have to see this, corona posted it last night. Funny funny, watch it all the way to the end.

http://birdloversonly.blogspot.com/2007/09/may-i-have-this-dance.html

There are people making in excess of $85,000/year without health insurance.
When these people require extensive hospital care, they sometimes are unable
to pay the bill without help from the insurance. Then their bill is paid by
those who carry health insurance.